Nuclear rockets.
Chris Gunn
The only sensible way to travel to Mars seems to be with Nuclear
rockets. The US has done a fair bit of research in this area.
Why is there no current program? The vestiges of the hippy era? Surely
that's about over.
I understand there are no new Nuclear power stations in the US?
There are a large number being built around the world now. Surly the
US is about due to get back into it.
Gunn
Damon Hill
news:oh3004hqm0mrskfg8...@4ax.com:
>
>
> The only sensible way to travel to Mars seems to be with Nuclear
> rockets. The US has done a fair bit of research in this area.
>
> Why is there no current program? The vestiges of the hippy era? Surely
> that's about over.
Lack of an actual need for a technology that could be done by chemical
propulsion, at least until funding is in place for a manned Mars
mission. Politics continues have something to do with it, too.
Presumably by 'nuclear rockets' you are referring to nuclear thermal
rocket technology, as pioneered by various US programs in the 60s.
> I understand there are no new Nuclear power stations in the US?
> There are a large number being built around the world now. Surly the
> US is about due to get back into it.
Yes. Licenses to build several new generating facilities, or to add
to existing ones, have been issued. Not really relevant to space
propulsion.
--Damon
Martha Adams
"Chris Gunn" <gun...@idontspamme.inet.net.nz> wrote in message
news:oh3004hqm0mrskfg8...@4ax.com...
I think this point of view is too restricted. I favor
getting to Mars anyhow you can do it. The nuclear thermal
rocket if implemented, could turn out to slow progress
over the long run, because it's so effective it could
divert people from thinking about other options.
For one thing, "Getting to Mars." Does that mean go to
Mars and stay, settling there? (Very good idea.) Or does
it mean, getting out to Mars, staying for a while, and
returning? These two strategies are very different in
their costs, risks, and longterm consequences. See
Zubrin's work on this topic: if you don't know Zubrin
then you don't know enough to have a good opinion on
this topic.
Another look at "Getting to Mars." Buzz Aldrin has been
talking about 'cyclers', vehicles or converted asteroids
in orbits that pass near or cross orbits of Terra and of
Mars. Instead of taking all of your life support stuff
with you, you hop over to the cycler and when it comes
near your objective you hop off again. The lifespace and
machinery on the cycler get used again and again and
again... you get the idea.
This is by the way, why I'm not much interested in Lunar
settlements. Luna is a hard rocky place: it has for
practical purposes no water; the carbon and nitrogen and
other lighter elements we need for life are scarce there,
which means, you spend delta V to get down and delta V
to get back up again, and you have very little to show
for it. But an asteroid is easy to get to and up again;
and some classes of asteroids seem very rich in what we
need to live.
Also re cyclers, people don't notice enough that while
space is very rich, not much of that richness is on the
surface of anything. You have to mine to get to it. But
when you have done your mining, you're inside the thing,
and with lots of mass around you the solar and cosmic
radiations out there are much attenuated. So Aldrin is
talking something big: cyclers are going to play a large
part in a future humanized Solar system.
I could ramble on and on, getting to Mars is a large
and a rich topic. At a kw/m^2, solar power is usable
for going out to Mars (if you're patient) and better
for going in toward Venus and Mercury. ...I hope there
will someday be a *real inhabited* Venus Equilateral.
And somewhere in a central lobby in it, a picture of
George O. Smith.
Anyhow, Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 Apr 11]
Ian Parker
how I describe it, is ion drive. You don't in fact need to put any
real impulse in, but as we are dealing with chaos some propulsion is
needed
- Ian Parker
BradGuth
Don't hold your breath. Most of us are flat broke, or getting there
fast. How about yourself? (got spare loot?)
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
I agree, in that bigger and better ion drives are the best ticket to
ride, that is once we achieve a surplus of national energy for the
task of creating LH2, LOx, H2O2 and a few other essential synfuels
that'll equal or replace fossil fuels that are going for a ransom
price that few of us can afford.
We'll need at least a 2X national energy grid, 100X in thorium
reactors for creating a spare teraWatt capacity, plus all the
renewable energy that we can muster.
. - Brad Guth
Willie...@gmail.com
On November 25, 1963 - following the burial of JFK (he was assasinated
Nobember 22, 1963) Lyndon Johnson and Robert McNamara reviewed the
space program budget for 1964 left to them by Kennedy. They cut back
post Apollo efforts, including the funding of the nuclear rocket
program.
Johnson rededicated this nation to the MOON. The space program became
a man on the moon program. Kennedy had a larger vision. That's why
he supported nuclear rockets from the first. Even back in 1958 he
made speechs about nuclear submarines, nuclear aircraft, and nuclear
rockets being used to advance the United States into the new arena of
space.
I just want to say that Nixon, who succeeded Johnson, and preceded
Kennedy as Vice President under Eisenhower, and opposed Kenney's bid
to be President in 1960 ended the nuclear rocket program altogether in
1972. Nixon was President from 1969 to 1974
Nixon resiged office in August 1974 following the Watergate
Hearings.
Again, the Nixon Library appears to be offline. So, I'm just
recounting from memory. Nixon organized a Space Task Group chaired by
Vice President Spiro Agnew who is the Chairman of the National Space
Council, providing direction to NASA - set up that way by Eisenhower
back in 1958.
VonBraun pushed Agnew to support a Mars expedition using the Nerva
upper stage to replace the SIVB. Agnew considered this and following
the moon landing in the summer of 1969 made a 4 minute speech urging
Congress to continue on to Mars by 1980. this was largely ignored.
Not ignored in November of 1969 was a blow-up in the media of a
comment by Agnew criticizing instant analysis of the President's
statements to the nation by a hostile media - which marginalized him
with the media.
A few months later he was charged with taking $29,000 in bribes while
governor of Maryland several years earlier, which resulted in criminal
prosecution for tax evasion among other charges. This ended his
leadership as Vice President on the Space Task Group and any
reasonable push for Mars.
VonBraun, who developed relationships with powerful people who could
help his cause of space development, had long standing relationships
with Agnew, as a consequence he was marginalized as well, and
sidelined and contributed very little to the work of the STG after
Agnew was charged with wrong-doing.
Agnew left office - resigned - to be followed by Nixon a few years
later. Nixon appointed Gerald Ford - and between vice Presidents, the
nuclear rocket program was killed, along with the large boosters, and
the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiment Program and Apollo Applications
Program. These were replaced with Apollo-Soyuz, Skylab (America's
first space station that cost only $1.5 billion), and Space Shuttle.
Saturn V boosters in production or finished, were allocated to these
other programs or sent to museums.
If vonBruan had his way at NASA he would have used a 'wet' skylab type
module to land a Skylab type module on the moon - calling it
Moonlab. Allowing stays on the lunar surface of 90 days or more.
Upgraded the Command/Service Module to orbit the moon untended, and
upgraded the lunar lander to carry 3 astronauts down and back - with
the CM pilot riding center seat above the ascent module engine. This
would be possible since the moonlab would have all the supplies needed
for maintaining all 3 for 90 days - and the LEM wouldn't be carrying
any equipment like rovers and such.
There are several ways to go to Mars with Nerva and updated Apollo
hardware, once you have some experience with moonlab.
The NERVA engine had nearly the same thrust as the J2 engine.
Replace the J2 with a nuclear powered NERVA and you double
performance.
Design the NERVA engine to operate at a low power level to heat up
either a brayton cycle engine, or use thermoelectric generators to
provide long term power and heat for long periods of time - and keep
the engine 'ready' for restart.
Get rid of the SIV-B bulkhead and stretch its length to accomodate
more volume, and you have a nice hydrogen upper stage.
Outfit the interior to operate as a space station like skylab and
moonlab - and you have a handy mission module or marslab.
Equip the nuclear SIVB variant with thermal protection at its base so
it can aerobrake and land after a ballistic re-entry.
Cap it with an Apollo command module, and you have a crew transfer and
an emergency recovery module.
Put a hatch in the base, similar to MOL versions of Gemini capsules,
and you don't have to separate, turn and dock to transfer crews.- or
remove the heat sheild entirely and permanently affix it to the SIV
airframe.
The NERVA engine burns off half the hydrogen getting you to Mars
trajectory - 'drying out' the 'wet' portion of the mission module near
the command module. The other half remaining of the hydrogen
propellant serves as an added sheild to the nuclear rocket - and to
solar flares - the engine has a setting to operate at low power
running a generator to power the ship - and that power is used by the
hydrogen refrigeration unit.
The nuclear powered stage is equipped with thermal protection at its
base, and aerobrakes onto Mars, carrying out a powered landing very
similar to that of the DCX after its return to Earth.
The astronauts stay on Mars for a number of months, and then return to
Earth blasting off the red planet with their nuclear rocket- burning
nearly the last of the hydrogen - there is a small amount left for
landing on Earth.. .
The vehicle aerobrakes and executes a soft touchdown near Jackass
Flats. The astronauts leave the spacecraft and are processed along
with their sample returns, at the Lunar Receiving Laboratory. The
rocket stage is sent to the Smithsonian, after all propellants and
hazards are removed, and the nuclear engine is removed, refurbished
and reused.
This program just described would have cost less than ISS and Shuttle
and given us far more.
Kennedy had a bold vision of American leadership in solar system
exploration. He was assasinated.
Immediately following the assination, Johnson reduced that vision to a
man on the moon, in honor of the slain Kennedy, and slashed the space
budgets for anything beyond the initial moon landing.
Agnew as chairman of the Space Task Group and the National Space
Council, supported a mission to Mars after conferring with vonBraun
following the moon landing. He was marginalized in the press, months
later and charged with criminal wrong doing. He resigned the vice
presidency and Gerald Ford was appointed to replace him. At the time
between Vice Presidents the STG issued its recommendation - abandon
Apollo era hardware and focus on a reusable space shuttle and a space
station. Nixon signed this into law in 1972 - and ended the NERVA/
ROVER programs along with all post Apollo planning...
With the advent of Shuttle and ISS - Man on the Moon became Man in
Space - which means Man on Orbit.
Here is what the JFK Library (which *IS* online today) says in support
of
News Conference 46
President John F. Kennedy
State Department Auditorium
Washington, D.C.
December 12, 1962
4:00 PM EDT (Wednesday)
332 In Attendance
QUESTION: Mr. President, after your trip to Los Alamos Laboratory, New
Mexico, is it your intention to ask for more money to speed up Project
Rover, or for nuclear propulsion in space?
THE PRESIDENT: We are going to let these tests go on of the reactor.
These tests should be completed by July. If they are successful, then
we will put more money into the program, which would involve the Nerva
and Rift, both the engine and the regular machine. We will wait until
July, however, to see if these tests are successful.
It should be understood that the nuclear rocket, even under the most
favorable circumstances, would not play a role in any first lunar
landing. This will not come into play until 1970 or '71. It would be
useful for future trips to the moon or trips to Mars. But we have a
good many areas competing for our available space dollars, and we have
to try to channel it into those programs which will bring us a result,
first, on our moon landing, and then to consider Mars.
Saturday December 8, 1961
10:06 - 11:03 a.m.
President John F. Kenney Diary
Visit to the Atomic Energy Commission's nuclear rocket development
station at the Rover Missile site Test Area, Jackson Flats, Nevada
http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/science21/NuclearRocket.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA
http://www.astronautix.com/engines/nerva.htm
In committing this nation to the moon, Kennedy was committing this
nation to be first in the exploration of space. The moon was to be
the first step, Mars the next, the other planets beyond that. A
continuing national effort of expansion, exploration and achievement
making Americans leaders in this next great wave of progress. Part of
that would be the development of nuclear rockets to propel our vessels
throughout the solar system.
President John F. Kennedy
Houston, Texas
September 12, 1962
If this capsule history of our progress teaches us anything, it is
that man, in his quest for knowledge and progress, is determined and
cannot be deterred. The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we
join in it or not, and it is one of the great adventures of all time,
and no nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can
expect to stay behind in the race for space.
Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the
first waves of the industrial revolutions, the first waves of modern
invention, and the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation
does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space.
We mean to be a part of it--we mean to lead it. For the eyes of the
world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and
we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of
conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we
shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with
instruments of knowledge and understanding.
Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this
Nation are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our
leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and
security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require
us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for
the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring
nation.
We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be
gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for
the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science
and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will
become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United
States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether
this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of
war. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the
hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the
hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored
and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the
mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of
ours.
There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer
space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves
the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation
many never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as
our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why,
35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this
decade and do the other things,
[i.e. nuclear rockets and exploration of Mars and the solar system]
not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that
goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and
skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept,
one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and
the others, too.
Here's what Kennedy had to say to Congress about nuclear rockets
President John F. Kennedy
Delivered in person before a joint session of Congress
May 25, 1961
IX. SPACE
Finally, if we are to win the battle that is now going on around
the world between freedom and tyranny, the dramatic achievements in
space which occurred in recent weeks should have made clear to us all,
as did the Sputnik in 1957, the impact of this adventure on the minds
of men everywhere, who are attempting to make a determination of which
road they should take. Since early in my term, our efforts in space
have been under review. With the advice of the Vice President, who is
Chairman of the National Space Council, we have examined where we are
strong and where we are not, where we may succeed and where we may
not. Now it is time to take longer strides--time for a great new
American enterprise--time for this nation to take a clearly leading
role in space achievement, which in many ways may hold the key to our
future on earth.
I believe we possess all the resources and talents necessary. But
the facts of the matter are that we have never made the national
decisions or marshalled the national resources required for such
leadership. We have never specified long-range goals on an urgent time
schedule, or managed our resources and our time so as to insure their
fulfillment.
Recognizing the head start obtained by the Soviets with their
large rocket engines, which gives them many months of leadtime, and
recognizing the likelihood that they will exploit this lead for some
time to come in still more impressive successes, we nevertheless are
required to make new efforts on our own. For while we cannot guarantee
that we shall one day be first, we can guarantee that any failure to
make this effort will make us last. We take an additional risk by
making it in full view of the world, but as shown by the feat of
astronaut Shepard, this very risk enhances our stature when we are
successful. But this is not merely a race. Space is open to us now;
and our eagerness to share its meaning is not governed by the efforts
of others. We go into space because whatever mankind must undertake,
free men must fully share.
I therefore ask the Congress, above and beyond the increases I
have earlier requested for space activities, to provide the funds
which are needed to meet the following national goals:
First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to
achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the
moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in
this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for
the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or
expensive to accomplish. We propose to accelerate the development of
the appropriate lunar space craft. We propose to develop alternate
liquid and solid fuel boosters, much larger than any now being
developed, until certain which is superior. We propose additional
funds for other engine development and for unmanned explorations--
explorations which are particularly important for one purpose which
this nation will never overlook: the survival of the man who first
makes this daring flight. But in a very real sense, it will not be one
man going to the moon--if we make this judgment affirmatively, it will
be an entire nation. For all of us must work to put him there.
Secondly, an additional 23 million dollars, together with 7
million dollars already available, will accelerate development of the
Rover nuclear rocket. This gives promise of some day providing a means
for even more exciting and ambitious exploration of space, perhaps
beyond the moon, perhaps to the very end of the solar system itself
News Conference 10
By President John F. Kennedy
State Department Auditorium, Washington, D.C.
Friday, April 21, 1961, 10:00 a.m. EST
QUESTION: Mr. President, you don't seem to be pushing the Space
Program nearly as energetically now as you suggested during the
campaign that you thought it should be pushed. In view of the feeling
of many people in this country that we must do everything we can to
catchup with the Russians as soon as possible, do you anticipate
applying any sort of crash program?
THE PRESIDENT: We have added, I think it was 130 million dollars to
the budget on Space several weeks ago, which provides some speed-up
for Saturn, and some speed-up for Nova, and some speed-up for Rover.
And I will say that the budget for space next year will be around two
billion dollars.
[note: that would be $20 billion in today's currency]
Now we are now, and have been for some time, attempting to make a
determination as to -- in developing larger boosters, whether the
emphasis should be put on chemical, nuclear rockets or liquid fuel,
how much this would cost, and some of these programs have been
estimated to be between twenty and forty billion dollars. We are
attempting to make a determination as to which program offers the best
hope before we embark on it, because you may commit a relatively small
sum of money now for results in 1967, 8 or 9, which will cost you
billions of dollars. And therefore the Congress passed yesterday the
bill providing for a Space Council which will be chaired by the Vice
President. We are attempting to make a determination as to which of
these various proposals offers the best hope. And when that
determination is made we will then make a recommendation to the
Congress.
In addition, we have to consider whether there is any program now,
regardless of its cost, which offers us hopes of being pioneers in a
project. It is possible to spend billions of dollars in these projects
in Space to the detriment of other programs and still not be
successful. We are behind, as I said before, in large boosters. We
have to make a determination whether there is any effort we could make
in time or money which could put us first in any new area.
Now I don't want to start spending the kind of money that I am talking
about without making a determination based on careful scientific
judgments as to whether a real success can be achieved or whether
because we are so far behind now is this particular race we are going
to be second in this decade.
So I would say to you that it is a matter of great concern, but I
think that before we break through and begin a program which would not
reach a completion, as you know, until the end of this decade; for
example, trips to the moon, may be ten years off, maybe a little less,
but are quite far away and involve, as I say, an enormous sum, I don't
think we ought to rush into it and begin them until we really know
where we are going to end up. And that study is now being undertaken
under the direction of the Vice President.
QUESTION: Mr. President, don't you agree that we should try to get to
the moon before the Russians, if we can?
THE PRESIDENT: If we can get to the moon before the Russians, we
should.
QUESTION: Isn't it your responsibility to apply the vigorous
leadership to spark up this program?
THE PRESIDENT: When you say "spark up the program," we first have to
make a judgment, based on the best information we can get, whether we
can be ahead of the Russians to the moon. We are now talking about a
program which may be -- which is many years away.
QUESTION: For instance, the Saturn is still on a forty-hour week,
isn't it, Mr. President ?
THE PRESIDENT: As I say, we have appropriated 126 million dollars more
to the Saturn, and we are attempting to find out what else we can do,
and Saturn is still going to put us well behind. Saturn does not offer
any hope of being first to the moon. Saturn is several years behind
the Soviet Union. I can just say to you that regardless of how much
money we spend on the Saturn, Saturn is going to put us -- we are
still going to be second. The question is whether the nuclear rocket,
or other kinds of chemical rockets offer us a better hope of making a
jump forward, but we are second, and the Saturn will not put us first.
I want, however, to speed up, if we can, on Saturn; and the Vice
President is now leading a study to see what we ought to do in this
area.
* * *
The search link to the LBJ libarary in Austin is broken this morning.
However, there are secret documents that have been declassified later
and available when the library search engine is up.
Willie...@gmail.com
hardware in existence at that time for about $5 billion 1960 dollars
($50 billion 2008 dollars). It is a preliminary mass budget and
doesn't pretend to be an accurate final tally - which could vary by
20% or more from these figures. It is suggestive though what we might
have been able to do by 1978 had we had the will to do it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Already, we have an improvement in performance to announce. The 1959
figures for Nerva show a specific impulse of 800 seconds. A tungsten/
ceramic based heat exchanger and pressure increase increased specific
impulse of 925 seconds is an exhaust velocity of 9.08 km/sec. (the
specific impulse achieved by 1971 - a year before the program was
cancelled, but about the time Kennedy had expected Nerva to by flying
in its first generation - a vehicle called RIFT).
The following fractions are based on the 64,000 kg projected on a
Translunar trajectory by the RIFT spacecraft. That is, I assume an
extra propellant module split into 2 parts carried ahead of the
Command Module, feeding a reactor behind a standard RIFT configuration
behind the Command Module (in the event of an escape tower or
emergency re-entry event, the 2 part tank is jettisoned and the escape
rockets - built into the base of the advanced Command Module - are
fired). This is what is left a RIFT upper stage with a CM atop it,
with a hatch communicating to a tunnel through a supply section to a
habitat that is launched 'wet' and drained completely during Mars
transfer insertion;
Propellant Mass: 43,265 kg (118,375 lb) 67.60%.
Empty Mass: 10,429 kg (22,992 lb) 16.29%.
Payload Mass: 10,306 kg (22,673 lb) 16.11%
The ideal stage velocity is;
Vf = 9.08 * LN(1/(1-0.6760) = 10.23 km/sec
Translunar trajectory is 10.85 km/sec. That's the speed this payload
is moving away from Earth.
A typical Earth-Mars Trajectory is shown here;
http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/~jfs/gif/HohmannTrajectory.gif
Which means we need about a 3.15 km/sec boost - which requires;
u = 1 - 1/EXP(1/(3.15/10.23)) = 26.50%
Since total mass is 64,000 kg - that's 16,962 kg of propellant. 39.2%
of the tank volume. That tank volume can be separated from the rest
of the tank volume with a bulkhead, and outfitted with a 'wet' station
that is used as a mission module. At 70 kg per cubic meter total
volume is 242.3 cubic meters (7,940 cubic feet). 85.6% of Skylab's
habitable volume.
A crew of 3 consuming 1 ton of consumables per year, over 3/4 of a
year consumes 2,250 kg of consumables so, our new numbers when we
arrive at Mars are;
Propellant Mass: 26,303 kg
Empty Mass: 10,429 kg
Payload Mass: 8,056 kg
When arriving at Mars the spacecraft is moving at 21.6 km/sec. Mars
is moving at 24.1 km/sec. This is a difference of 2.5 km/sec. Far
less than the 10.85 km/sec which the Apollo capsule hits Earth. The
spacecraft also effectively falls from infinity so the escape velocity
of Mars is added to this speed. We actually add energies and comput
velocities that way. Total speed of the spacecraft when it hits
Mars' atmosphere is no more than 7.5 km/sec. Again, less than a re-
entry into Earth's atmosphere when returning from the Moon.
The Mars' atmosphere is similar to the stratosphere of Earth. Due to
the lower gravity, the lapse rate, the rate at which the presure drops
at you change altitude, is slower, so despite its low pressure, its
relatively thicker for a given range of pressures.
A vehicle designed to slow in Earth's stratosphere, has less gravity
to contend with, and more space to slow down, than on Earth. So, by
entering the atmosphere of Mars at the right angle, and having a small
amount of lift, is sufficient to have a rather leisurely 2.0 to 2.5
gee deceleration from no more than 7.5 km/sec An arc around the
planet 1,145.6 km at this acceleration in 12.73 minutes brings the
vehicle to about 0.5 km/sec falling straight down to the Mars
surface.
Using the nuclear engine to execute a powered touchdown, in a manner
similar to the LEM or DC-X vehicle requires the following propellant
fraction;
u = 1 - 1/EXP(0.5/10.23) = 0.49% which is 218.4 kg of hydrogen
fuel.
Which is less than the mass of wings or parachutes needed to achieve
the same thing in the Mars environment.
The mass breakdown following 220 kg of hydrogen used in this maneuver
Propellant Mass: 26,083 kg
Empty Mass: 10,429 kg
Payload Mass: 8,056 kg
The vehicle stays on Mars for 0.53 years. The crew of three consume a
total of 1,590 kg of consumables over this period. The nuclear rocket
is kept at a low level of power and used to power the spacecraft - and
run the hydrogen cryogenic refrigeration unit - as well as stay ready
for lift-off.
The low-z ablative material that the heat shield is made from, is also
an excellent absorber of radiation - and this surrounds the nuclear
reactor on all sides with sufficient thickness to provide sheilding
for the crew when on Mars and in space. It also provides a sheild
from solar flares. Merely by orienting the heat sheild toward the sun
during transit, solar radiation is absorbed. Supplies, water food,
oxygen, as well as propellant are stored just above the heat sheild
providing additional protection.
The system must accelerate to 7.5 km/sec from the surface of Mars.
This requires 51.96% of the total vehicle mass which is now
Propellant Mass: 26,083 kg
Empty Mass: 10,429 kg
Payload Mass: 6,466 kg
so, 22,331 kg of propellant are needed to execute this maneuver. The
spacecraft mass breakdown is now;
Propellant Mass: 3,752 kg
Empty Mass: 10,439 kg
Payload Mass: 6,466 kg
The system takes 0.75 years to travel back, and three people consume
2,250 kg of air, water, food and filters.
So, arriving at Earth at 14.5 km/sec the spacecraft fractions are;
Propellant Mass: 3,752 kg
Empty Mass: 10,439 kg
Payload Mass: 4,216 kg
The spacecraft does a similar maneuver in the Earth's stratosphere,
that it did in Mars atmosphere. It enters at a shallow angle, and
zips around the Earth decelerating at 2.5 gees to 3.5 gees travelling
3,557 km and again falling straight down through the air at 0.25 km/
sec.
Executing a powered touchdown on Earth again as on Mars, with the
100,000 kgf thrust engine, is easily achieved by powering up at the
correct altitude and adjusting mass flow rate over an operable range -
consumes 2.41% of total vehicle mass which in this case is 44.4 kg of
propellant. Again far smaller than wings or parachutes.
This leaves 3,700 kg of hydrogen for 'boil-off' and losses over the
3.5 year mission, and 4,200 kg of non-consumable payload, including
the crew of three astronauts, spacesuits, instruments, personal
effects and sample return provision, heat sheild, reactor, etc.
A final note on re-entry. The Earth has water covering 2/3 of its
surface. So, it seems that it is likely that a returning spacecraft
might fall into the ocean. However, by modulating altitude,
deceleration rate is controlled, and by orienting the small degree of
lift - 0.5 gees - a rather large spiraling turn can be executed over a
3,000 to 4,000 km long arc. By selecting 60 landing points across the
surface of the Earth, ANY entry point can navigate to one of these
landing points - no matter what the entry location. Furthermore, by
selecting a point carefully across a 6,000 km arc of allowable entry
locations, this number of points can be reduced to 24. Finally, by
controlling the precise time of arrival over a 24 hours period - the
landing point is reduced to 1. Jackass Flats, Nev, where the nuclear
factilies exist to handle the engine, or the unlikely event of a
crash.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version of Saturn C-5 considered with small nuclear thermal stage in
place of S-IVB oxygen/hydrogen stage.
This from Astronautix - Mark Wade's Encyclopedia.
Manufacturer: Von Braun.
LEO Payload: 155,000 kg (341,000 lb). to: 185 km Orbit. at: 28.00
degrees.
Payload: 64,000 kg (141,000 lb). to a: Translunar trajectory.
Liftoff Thrust: 33,350.000 kN (7,497,370 lbf).
Total Mass: 2,841,040 kg (6,263,420 lb).
Core Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft).
Total Length: 100.00 m (320.00 ft).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stage Data - Saturn C-5N
Stage Number: 1. 1 x Stage: Saturn IC C-5A.
Gross Mass: 2,217,285 kg (4,888,276 lb).
Empty Mass: 131,495 kg (289,896 lb).
Thrust (vac): 38,257.990 kN (8,600,738 lbf).
Isp: 304 sec.
Burn time: 160 sec.
Isp(sl): 265 sec.
Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft).
Span: 19.00 m (62.00 ft).
Length: 42.87 m (140.64 ft).
Propellants: Lox/Kerosene.
No Engines: 5.
Engine: F-1. Status:
Study 1961.
Final first stage design of Saturn C-5 (November 1961)
before selection as Apollo launch vehicle and development in Saturn
V.
Stage Number: 2. 1 x Stage: Saturn II C-5A.
Gross Mass: 384,057 kg (846,700 lb).
Empty Mass: 31,740 kg (69,970 lb).
Thrust (vac): 4,446.648 kN (999,646 lbf).
Isp: 420 sec. Burn time: 320 sec.
Isp(sl): 200 sec.
Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft).
Span: 10.06 m (33.00 ft).
Length: 21.39 m (70.17 ft).
Propellants: Lox/LH2.
No Engines: 5.
Engine: J-2.
Status: Study 1961.
Final common second stage design for Saturn C-3, C-4 and C-5 (November
1961).
Developed into Saturn V second stage.
Stage Number: 3. 1 x Stage: Saturn S-N C-5N.
Gross Mass: 53,694 kg (118,375 lb).
Empty Mass: 10,429 kg (22,992 lb).
Thrust (vac): 266.799 kN (59,979 lbf).
Isp: 800 sec.
Burn time: 1,250 sec.
Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft).
Span: 10.06 m (33.00 ft).
Length: 19.30 m (63.30 ft).
Propellants: Nuclear/LH2.
No Engines: 1.
Engine: Nerva.
Status: Study 1961.
Nuclear upper stage considered in lieu of S-IVB in final Saturn C-5
study in November 1961.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturn C-5N Chronology
1954 October 18 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
Nuclear rocket engine proposed.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
At the suggestion of Theodore von Kármán and following a request of
Gen. H. B. Thatcher, an Ad Hoc Committee of the Scientific Advisory
Board met in the Pentagon to consider the application of nuclear
energy to missile propulsion. In its report, the Committee "noted that
there was an almost complete hiatus in the study of the nuclear rocket
from 1947 following a report by North American Aviation, until a 1953
report by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Because the technical
problems appear so severe, and because another 6 years of no progress
in this area would seem to be unfortunate," the Committee felt that a
continuing study both analytical and experimental, at a modest level
of effort, should be carried on.
1955 June 1 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
NERVA project begins.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
NACA Lewis Laboratory presented ARDC with results of air-breathing
nuclear propulsion systems for manned applications, leading to AEC-AF
Pluto project, and also initiated comparison of nuclear rocket with
chemical systems for ICBM, a concept of use to Rover program.
1955 November 2 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
NERVA go-ahead.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
The Atomic Energy Commission approved, on the basis of a statement of
interest by the Department of Defense, the proposed plans of the Los
Alamos Scientific and the Radiation Laboratories of the University of
California, for the study and development of nuclear power for rocket
propulsion.
1957 March 18 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
NERVA research cut back. (Eisenhower/Nixon)
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
As a result of guidance from the Secretary of Defense as to desired
level of effort, the Atomic Energy Commission reduced its program on
nuclear rocket propulsion to a single laboratory effort, phasing out
work at the University of California Radiation Laboratory and
concentrating AEC development efforts at Los Alamos Scientific
Laboratory.
1957 June 1 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
NERVA advanced concepts studied.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
Research on tungsten nuclear rocket propulsion systems initiated by
NACA Lewis Laboratory, and other feasible systems for practical
nuclear rocket systems, such as 1958 concept of coaxial jet gaseous
reactor, followed.
1959 May 25-26 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-2, Nova 4L, Saturn C-3BN,
Saturn C-5N.
National booster program, Dyna-Soar, and Mercury
Nation: USA.
Program: Apollo.
Spacecraft: Mercury.
The national booster program, Dyna-Soar, and Project Mercury were
discussed by the Research Steering Committee. Members also presented
reviews of Center programs related to manned space flight. Maxime A.
Faget of STG endorsed lunar exploration as the present goal of the
Committee although recognizing the end objective as manned
interplanetary travel. George M. Low of NASA Headquarters recommended
that the Committee:
Adopt the lunar landing mission as its long-range objective.
Investigate vehicle staging so that Saturn could be used for
manned lunar landings without complete reliance on Nova.
Make a study of whether parachute or airport landing techniques
should be emphasized.
Consider nuclear rocket propulsion possibilities for space flight.
Attach importance to research on auxiliary power plants such as
hydrogen-oxygen systems.
1959 July 1 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
Kiwi-A first experimental nuclear rocket tested.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
The first experimental reactor (Kiwi-A) in the nuclear space rocket
program operated successfully at full temperature and duration at
Jackass Flats, Nev.
1959 December 19 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
NERVA development roles AEC/NASA.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
The Chairman, AEC, in a letter to the Administrator of NASA, proposed
a flight test objective be established for the nuclear rocket program
and proposed a technical program and division of agency
responsibilities to achieve those objectives.
1960 July 5 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn V, Nova 4L, Orion, Saturn C-3BN,
Saturn C-5N, Saturn I RIFT.
House recommends a high priority manned expedition to the moon
Nation: USA.
Program: Apollo.
The House Committee on Science and Astronautics declared: "A high
priority program should be undertaken to place a manned expedition on
the moon in this decade. A firm plan with this goal in view should be
drawn up and submitted to the Congress by NASA. Such a plan, however,
should be completely integrated with other goals, to minimize total
costs. The modular concept deserves close study. Particular attention
should be paid immediately to long lead-time phases of such a
program." The Committee also recommended that development of the F-1
engine be expedited in expectation of the Nova launch vehicle, that
there be more research on nuclear engines and less conventional
engines before freezing the Nova concept, and that the Orion project
be turned over to NASA. It was the view of the Committee that "NASA's
10-year program is a good program, as far as it goes, but it does not
go far enough. Furthermore the space program is not being pushed with
sufficient energy.
1960 July 8 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
Kiwi-A Prime tested at full power.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
Second experimental reactor (Kiwi-A Prime) in the Project Rover
nuclear rocket program was successfully tested at full power and
duration at Jackass Flats, Nev.
1960 July 14-15 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-2, Saturn C-3BN, Saturn
C-5N, Saturn I RIFT.
Space Exploration Program Council
Nation: USA.
Program: Apollo.
The third meeting of the Space Exploration Program Council was held at
NASA Headquarters. The question of a speedup of Saturn C-2 production
and the possibility of using nuclear upper stages with the Saturn
booster were discussed. The Office of Launch Vehicle Programs would
plan a study on the merits of using nuclear propulsion for some of
NASA's more sophisticated missions. If the study substantiated such a
need, the amount of in-house basic research could then be determined.
1960 September 29 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn
I RIFT.
RAND Corporation to evaluate nuclear propulsion missions
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
In a memorandum to NASA Associate Administrator Robert C. Seamans,
Jr., Robert L. King, Executive Secretary, described the action taken
on certain items discussed at the July 14-15 meeting of the Space
Exploration Program Council. Among these actions was the awarding of a
contract to The RAND Corporation to evaluate missions for which
nuclear propulsion would be desirable. Included in the study would be
the determination of availability dates, cost of development,
operational costs, the safety aspects of the missions, and an
evaluation of research requirements.
1960 October 7 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
NERVA test facilities bidder's conference.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
AEC briefing held at the Nevada Test Site at Jackass Flats, Nev., for
representatives of 26 companies for proposals to study the
requirements for a National Nuclear Rocket Engine Development
Facility. Existing test facilities are fully committed to the
development of nuclear reactors.
1960 October 19 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
Project Rover request for bids.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
Kiwi-A No. 3 static test of nuclear rocket propulsion was successfully
conducted at AEC Nevada test site, resulting in NASA-AEC call for bids
for industrial development phase of Project Rover on November 1,
1960.
1961 February 2 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn C-3BN, Saturn C-5N, Saturn I
RIFT.
NERVA Request for Proposal.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
NASA-AEC Space Nuclear Propulsion Office invited industry to submit
proposals for participation in development of Nerva (nuclear engine
for rocket vehicle application), a part of Project Rover initiated in
1955 by USAF-AEC.
1961 August 28 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn I RIFT, Saturn C-3BN, Saturn
C-5N, Saturn I RIFT.
NERVA facilities contract.
Nation: USA.
Program: NERVA.
NASA selected Vitro Engineering Co. for negotiation of a design
contract for an engine maintenance and disassembly building, one of
the facilities to be a part of the National Nuclear Rocket Development
Center.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willie...@gmail.com
Had we executed a Mars Expedition/Lunar Base program in parallel with
the Apollo 'crash' program, using the hardware developed for military
purposes at the end of 1958 (the F1 and Nerva) we would have raised
the total program cost from $21 billion to $35 billion, and had a
lunar base in 1972 along with an expedition to Mars in 1972.
Had Kennedy asked the Russians to co-operate with us in 1963 (check
out the text of his speech he was going to give in Dallas the day he
was shot) we likely could have cut that $35 billion to $20 billion -
the cost of Apollo - and set the stage for further cuts in the future
as Europe, Japan and China joined the USA/USSR consortium - and our
capabilities expanded.
September 20, 1963
President, in address to the United Nations General Assembly, proposes
additional cooperation with Soviet Union, including outer space
exploration--United States and Soviet Union subsequently agree on
outer space disarmament move.
Two months later he was assasinated in Dallas where he was to announce
publicly this goal of cooperation before submitting his NASA budget
request for 1964 to Congress. Three days after the assasination,
Johnson and McNamara review the budget for 1964 and slash it 23% -
killing post Apollo activity, including nuclear rockets, and nuclear
pulse rockets. Johnson converts the exploration of the solar system
to a man on the moon program. Once the moon is achieved, the 4.3% of
the US budget spent by Kennedy has been reduced to 1.0% and has never
gone above that figure ever since.
Before leaving office, in 1967, Johnson ratifies the Outer Space
Treaty which prohibits nuclear pulse rockets, meaning that no signer
of the treaty may operate nuclear pulse rockets in space.
Nuclear pulse rockets use small atomic charges to drive large rockets
of immense capability at high speed across the solar system. Specific
impulse ranges up to 10,000 km/sec and more - 1 million times as
energetic and 1,000 times faster than chemical rockets - dramatically
increasing size and payload fractions - with the possibility of
reducing costs to that associated with ocean shipping instead of
something associated with hypersonic transport.
As I grew up and watched all this, I fully expected us to have a base
on the moon by the time I graduated high school, and have a landing on
Mars by my Junior year in college.
http://trashotron.com/agony/columns/05-24-02.htm
I expected by the time I left graduate school in aerospace
engineering, I would be working on the nuclear pulse rockets described
in SPACE MISSION PLANNING THE FUTURE OF SPACEFLIGHT: The Next 25 Years
1968-1993.
Of course it didn't happen, and I took a different path.
Willie...@gmail.com
RIFT replacement stage
Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft).
Span: 10.06 m (33.00 ft).
Length: 19.30 m (63.30 ft).
Its the diameter of the stage below!
Note the diameter of the centrifuge of the fictional spaceship
Discovery
www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3f.html
35 ft.
It spun once every 10 seconds to give it a 1/6th gee - once every 5
seconds would give it 1/3rd gee - same as Mars. - 35 ft x 10 ft
occupies 293 cubic meters - about that of the other two mission
modules. I would lower the ceiling and put more storage in the
unoccupied volume.
Just something to think about.
I know I thought about it alot in 1968 when the movie came out! lol.
Sheez
Willie...@gmail.com
Winged orbital launch vehicle.
Year: 1963.
Family: Saturn V.
Country: USA.
Status: Study 1963.
In June 1962 NASA funded studies with several contractors on
Operations and Logistics for Space Stations. North American's study
was dated 18 March 1963. The second alternative was a two-stage
reusable booster derived from the Saturn V. This would boost either an
11,400 kg cargo, or a half-disc lifting body spaceplane, which would
accommodate two crew plus ten passengers and minor cargo
The next S-IC flyback booster study was made in 1963 by NASA-MSFC in
collaboration with Boeing. The Boeing 922-12 had wings with span of 45
m and 930 sq m area. The wingtip fins provided a total vertical area
of 85 sq m each. A manned cockpit would have been just ahead of the
left wing. The underwing jet engine pods would have housed 6 x J93-F3
engines or 8 x J58's. The wings were separable and could be flown
without the S-IC or used to ferry stock S-IC stages. MSFC estimated
use of the wings as a flyback booster would cut the two-stage Saturn
IC/Saturn II payload by 20%. Recovery of the S-II stage was also
considered, but this would have reduced payload by 70%.
[note: replacing the J2 with NERVA engines would result in reusable
nuclear upper stages which would increase payload by similar amounts
mentioned here due to improved engine performance]
Similar concepts were later proposed by MSFC (1967), Convair (1967),
and then for Shuttle Phase B (Grumman 1971). They continued to be
dusted off occasionally right to the end of the 20th Century...
Manufacturer: Boeing.
LEO Payload: 80,000 kg (176,000 lb). to: 300 km Orbit. at: 28.00
degrees.
[note: altitude is higher than other references resulting in
artificially lower payloads]
[note: no translunar injection mass is given which cannot be fudged]
Liftoff Thrust: 33,000.000 kN (7,418,000 lbf).
Total Mass: 2,720,000 kg (5,990,000 lb).
Core Diameter: 10.60 m (34.70 ft).
Total Length: 107.20 m (351.70 ft).
Span: 45.00 m (147.00 ft).
dump...@hotmail.com
http://www.fas.org/nuke/space/c08tw_2.htm
While launching payloads from Earth's surface is a non-starter,
I wonder if a Timberwind upper stage on a conventional rocket
would've been useful for missions to other planets.
BradGuth
Of course it would, just like an ion thruster of Rn222 or of some
other radioactive ions would accomplish that task with fuel and
payload to spare.
. - Brad Guth
Chris Gunn
<damon...@comcast.netnet> wrote:
>Chris Gunn <gun...@idontspamme.inet.net.nz> wrote in
>news:oh3004hqm0mrskfg8...@4ax.com:
>> The only sensible way to travel to Mars seems to be with Nuclear
>> rockets. The US has done a fair bit of research in this area.
>>
>> Why is there no current program? The vestiges of the hippy era? Surely
>> that's about over.
>
>Lack of an actual need for a technology that could be done by chemical
>propulsion, at least until funding is in place for a manned Mars
>mission. Politics continues have something to do with it, too.
To be fair, there's no a whole lot of use for a NTR except a Mars
mission.
>Presumably by 'nuclear rockets' you are referring to nuclear thermal
>rocket technology, as pioneered by various US programs in the 60s.
Yup.
>> I understand there are no new Nuclear power stations in the US?
>> There are a large number being built around the world now. Surly the
>> US is about due to get back into it.
>
>Yes. Licenses to build several new generating facilities, or to add
>to existing ones, have been issued. Not really relevant to space
>propulsion.
Jolly good. I'm just thinking it's relevant RE public opinion on all
things nuclear.
Gunn.
Chris Gunn
<ianpa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The logical propulsion system for a quadrature spacecraft - that is
>how I describe it, is ion drive. You don't in fact need to put any
>real impulse in, but as we are dealing with chaos some propulsion is
>needed
I daresay.
Another thought (not entirely relevant) is that if your asteroid is
sufficiently massive and conductive, you could use it as a heatsink
for a nuclear power station, allowing a more powerful/efficient
propulsion
Gunn.
Chris Gunn
wrote:
>"Chris Gunn" <gun...@idontspamme.inet.net.nz> wrote in message
>news:oh3004hqm0mrskfg8...@4ax.com...
>> The only sensible way to travel to Mars seems to be with Nuclear
>> rockets. The US has done a fair bit of research in this area.
>>
>> Why is there no current program? The vestiges of the hippy era? Surely
>> that's about over.
>>
>> I understand there are no new Nuclear power stations in the US?
>> There are a large number being built around the world now. Surly the
>> US is about due to get back into it.
>> Gunn
>
>I think this point of view is too restricted. I favor
>getting to Mars anyhow you can do it. The nuclear thermal
>rocket if implemented, could turn out to slow progress
>over the long run, because it's so effective it could
>divert people from thinking about other options.
Another possibility is without NTRs, people may decide it's all too
hard and give up. Certainly we've been not going to Mars for a long
time now ;-)
>For one thing, "Getting to Mars." Does that mean go to
>Mars and stay, settling there? (Very good idea.) Or does
>it mean, getting out to Mars, staying for a while, and
>returning? These two strategies are very different in
>their costs, risks, and longterm consequences. See
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.
>Zubrin's work on this topic: if you don't know Zubrin
>then you don't know enough to have a good opinion on
>this topic.
You think his ideas are so novel?
>Another look at "Getting to Mars." Buzz Aldrin has been
>talking about 'cyclers', vehicles or converted asteroids
>in orbits that pass near or cross orbits of Terra and of
>Mars. Instead of taking all of your life support stuff
>with you, you hop over to the cycler and when it comes
>near your objective you hop off again. The lifespace and
>machinery on the cycler get used again and again and
>again... you get the idea.
So that people can regularly have painfully long wasteful inefficient
transfers? What a nightmare.
>This is by the way, why I'm not much interested in Lunar
>settlements. Luna is a hard rocky place: it has for
>practical purposes no water; the carbon and nitrogen and
>other lighter elements we need for life are scarce there,
>which means, you spend delta V to get down and delta V
>to get back up again, and you have very little to show
>for it. But an asteroid is easy to get to and up again;
>and some classes of asteroids seem very rich in what we
>need to live.
If you mean Lunar is no good for a large permanent settlement, You've
got a point. Asteroids would also be dodgy.
>Also re cyclers, people don't notice enough that while
>space is very rich, not much of that richness is on the
>surface of anything. You have to mine to get to it. But
Mining? An energy intensive operation. Another nightmare.
>when you have done your mining, you're inside the thing,
>and with lots of mass around you the solar and cosmic
>radiations out there are much attenuated. So Aldrin is
>talking something big: cyclers are going to play a large
>part in a future humanized Solar system.
Solar radiation is the main issue for long durations, and there
electrical engineering solutions.
I really don't see the point in cyclers.
>I could ramble on and on, getting to Mars is a large
>and a rich topic. At a kw/m^2, solar power is usable
>for going out to Mars (if you're patient) and better
>for going in toward Venus and Mercury. ...I hope there
>will someday be a *real inhabited* Venus Equilateral.
With a day that long? The first thing you want to do is smack it on
the edge with a largish fast dwarf planet, just to get it spinning.
>And somewhere in a central lobby in it, a picture of
>George O. Smith.
>
>Anyhow, Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 Apr 11]
Gunn
Chris Gunn
wrote:
<snip>
That was quit verbose!
Gunn.
Rand Simberg
Gunn <gun...@idontspamme.inet.net.nz> made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:
Not for him.
Willie...@gmail.com
I've gon over this before. Brad has either chosen to ignore the facts
or continue to lie about the facts just to confuse people about
nuclear physics.
Fact is, there is fusion of lightweight elements, that occurs under
high temperature and pressure - which is controllable. There is
fission of heavy elements that occurs uner low temperatures and
pressure which is controllable. Then there is radioactive decay which
is a natural process that is uncontrollable.
Radon 222 releases its energy by natural radioactive decay and is
uncontrollable. It is totally unsuitable for a rocket given the low
level of thrusts and the massive quantity of the rare material needed
to make any sort of system with it.
While Radon gas is easily detectable in the parts per billion range
and its wide spread across the entire earth and affects air quality
indoors, it is not especially abundant. Something can be detectable
and a problem over a wide area and still involve minute amounts of
material. That perfectly describes Radon especially Radon 222. Brad
obviously confuses something being widely spread and common - and
something that is common in abundance. Two different things Brad.
Well to remember it. There are only 150 atoms of Radon of all types
in a milli-liter of air. Summed over the whole planet, not much Radon
at all - and given the reaction rate of Radon 222 - even less of that.
Now the greatest possible amount of thrust you get out of the decay of
Radon 222 is easily computed assuming you can get a mass of it to
plate on a peice of aluminum or something..
Thrust is easily computed as thrust in Newtons (F) is equal to mass
flow rate of the jet (mdot) in kg/sec times exhaust velocity in meters/
second (Ve)
F = mdot * Ve
So, what are the relevant numbers for Rn222?
Well a gram of Rn222 has a half life of 3.82 days. And a gram of Rn
222 has 6.02e+23 atoms divided by 222 which is 2.71e+21 atoms. Half
of hese will decay in 330,000 seconds (3.82 days) That's 8.21e+15
reactions per second on average. That's 3 micrograms per second.
That's the amount of radon consume. This is broken down into Polonium
218 and Helium 4. The mass flow in the exhaust jet on the rocket Brad
is imagining is actually 4/222 times smaller - or 54.6 nanograms/
sec. That's our mdot
mdot = 54.6e-12 kg/sec
Actual rate is 41% higher than that at the beginning and 29% lower at
the end.
We'll use this average as an estimate.
You get Poloinium 218 - and an alpha particle Helium 4. The Polonium
generally stays put,and the alpha particle comes off with 5.5 MeV of
energy. That gives us the power of the rocket.
1 MeV = 1.602e-13 Joules
So,
5.5 MeV = 8.811e-13 Joules
per alpha reaction. We have then
8.21e+15 * 8.811e-13 = 7.233 kilojoules
and a mass of 54.6 nanograms which implies a velocity of;
E = 1/2 m V^2 ---> V = SQRT(2*E/m) = 16,277,132.8 ,m/sec
So, now we can figure out force;
F = mdot * Ve = 54.6e-12 kg * 1.67e+7 = 888.7 micro-newtons.
We started with a gram of the gas remember? So, that's 90.5 micro-
gees.
THAT WON'T VARY - and will get considerably worse over periods longer
than four days.
The velocity a gram of radon gas - not counting the weight of the
alpha particle refletor to create the jet - will get to in 3.82 days
is;
V = a * t = 9,82 * 90.5e-6 * 330,000 = 293.2 meters per second.
Add the weight of the reflector, say its a gram too - a sort of light
weight floodlamp sort of affair that sprays alpha particles in one
direction to produce thrust. the speed would be half this 146.6
meters/second.
The next four days, it will accelerate to half this speed, 73.3 m/sec
Then half again in another four days 36.65 m/sec
Then half again in another four days 18.325 m/sec
do this for a year - a decade - it will never go faster than 293.2
meters/second.
A MEMs based rocket -
http://www.me.berkeley.edu/mrcl/rockets.html
massing one gram burning one gram of hydrogen oxygen gas produces an
exhaust with a speed of 4,469 m/sec. About 1/4000th the speed of the
radon rocket. But, ALL of the propellant participates, which means
your final velocity is;
Vf = 4,459 * ln(1/(1-.5)) = 3,097.6 m/sec
Over 10x faster!! AND its controllable, storeable, and produces far
higher thrusts to weight.
What if you took the gram of radium and heated up a gram of hydrogen
gas with the 7.233 kilowatt alpha stream, using it as a heat source
over three days? Well, then you'd have a sort of thermal nuclear
rocket using a decay process.
Total energy would be
7,233 watts x 330,000 seconds = 2.386 gigajoules
Applied to 1 gram of material that's
V = sqrt(2*E/m) = sqrt(2* 2.386e+9 / 1e-3) = 2,184,898.1 m/sec
Now we have something. Apply the same rocket equiation after adding
one gram of MEMs rocket
Vf = 2,184,898.1 * ln(1/(1-0.333)) = 885.9 kilometers per second!!
This is 80x faster than escape velocity.
What's the thrust to weight?
F = mdot * Ve
1 gram dispensed over 330,000 seconds is
mdot = 3 micrograms per second = 3e-9 kg/sec
So F = 2,184,898.1 *3e-9 = 6.62 grams force thrust.
With a 3 gram vehicle mass, you're pulling two gees.
Hmm... this is not what you proposed originally, but something tells
me your proposal will morph into this. hahaha...
Did I do this calculation right? This seems to good to be true.
You can control thrust level by controlling mass flow rate of the
hydrogen - but that robs you of total delta vee since you're wasting
energy.
Don't know if you're engine can hold together - that's another
technical issue. Alpha particles are an advantage.
Cooling the exhaust down to something like a miniature Nerva powered
by radio-isotope- you can get 10,000 m/sec - which doubles the speed
over the MEMs chemical rocket - and uses all your propellant at full
thrust in an hour or so - and increases thrust to weight by 40x -
which means you can make something massing 40 grams - with your 1 gram
of radon - add a small payload and get a MEMS base rocket to orbit.
but your power level drops by half every 3.82 days.
You could thrust to the moon at higher Isps at constant gee just like
in the fusion system.- get there in 3 hours. Hang around an hour. 3
hours back. That's less than 3.82 days. Recharge your rocket.
Let's say we got 10x to 1 between payload weight and radon weight.
That means for each kg of payload, you'd have 100 grams of radon
gas.
So, to send 100 tons to the moon and back - you'd need 10 tons of
radon gas.
Can you get a gram of radon 222 even to build mems stuff with?
Well the way Radon is made in the lab is that you put radium 226 in an
aqueous solution and fill a container with it. The radon gas bubbles
to the top, and you have pure radon 222 which you can draw off fresh -
compress in a container, and have some sort of reflector that would
concentrate the energetic alpha particles into a stream of hydrogen
moving through a tube at the center of a cylinder -and exhausting
through a delaval nozzle. If things got really hot, you'd ionize the
hydorgen and handle it electrostatically.
Radon has no stable isotopes, its generated by the following series of
decay processes;
238U (4.5 x 109 yr) →
234Th (24.1 days) →
234Pa (1.18 min) →
234U (250,000 yr) →
230Th (75,000 yr) →
226Ra (1,600 yr) →
* 222Rn (3.82 days) →
218Po (3.1 min) →
218At (1.5 s) →
218Rn (35 ms) →
214Pb (26.8 min) →
214Bi (19.7 min) →
214Po (164 μs) →
210Pb (22.3 yr) →
210Bi (5.01 days) →
210Po (138 days) →
206Pb (stable).
These are ALL *decay'* processes.
YOU CANNOT CONTROL THEIR RATE.
You cannot turn them off,
You cannot turn them on,
You cannot modulate their output.
If you want that you're talking nuclear energy and you want get
yourself a nuclear reactor fission or fusion it doesn't matter. THen
you can adjust reaction rate, power level thrust the whole nine yards.
Radon 222 has a half life of 3.82 days. That means in 4 days activity
drops by more than half. 4 days later,more than 1/20th. What the
hell good is that?
You need a factory to make Radon 222 to supply your lightbub or heater
and that's basically a pile of Radium 226 which has a half life of
1,600 years - which means its activity is far far lower so you need a
lot of it.
Since the ratio between 3.82 days and 1,600 years is 152,984.3 to 1 -
for every kg per second of Radon 222 you consume, you'll nee to carry
along somewhere in your supply chain, 153 metric tons of radon 226.
And where do you get that? That's right from 430 million tons of
Uranium 238. Got it?
430 milion tons of Uranium 238 per second gives you
153 tons of radon 226 per second which gives you
1 kilogram of radon 222 per second.
If you want to accumulate 1 gram of Radon 222 in say 3,300 seconds to
fill your micro Nerva you will need 46 kilo grams of Radium.in
solution. 1 gram every 33,000 seconds - 9 hours - the cycle time from
Earth to Moon and back - requires 4.6 kg. So, 10 metric tons per
flight cycle requires 46,000 tons of radium in aqueous solution
somewhere at the launch center to keep the radium heater supplied with
the gas.
Again assuming all my calculations are correct, which I should check
since this variation does look interesting.
Radium is produced as a byproduct with Uranium and Vanadium. There
are 41,000 tons of Uranium produced each year. - I can't find the rate
of production of radium but judging by the differences in their
reaction rates, I'd say you'd be lucky to get 300 kg per year of the
stuff which is 1/100,000th what you need. .
I seem to recall its a minor consituent of mining operations - so, the
10 tons payload might have to be reuced to something like 100 grams
payload.. But I don't know this.
Radium chloride in solution will produce radon gas at a known rate for
a long long time. You'd need a series of big tanks containing maybe a
million tons of radium chloride solution to get the needed amounts of
radon to support a heater that would run a constant gee hydrogen
rocket from Earth to Moon
Again assuming my calculations are correct.
.
Willie...@gmail.com
Radioisotope rockets have been developed and built and studied
thoroughly. Not the direct use of the alpha particles however.
Radon 222 is 36x more active than Polonium 210 - which means power
levels and thrust levels are that much higher.
A MEMs poodle rocket! lol. Interesting.
46 tons of radium supports something like 10 kg to the moon and back.
If we can use 'stale' radon gas - in our heater - we might increase to
100 kg - over a longer collector cycle - from the same 46 to 50 tons.
A spherical tank 4 m (12.8 ft0 in diameter of radium chloride
solution, and a collector tupe up top, compressing the radon gas at 14
bar or so into the heater -
This would be made into a rocket belt - attached to a spacesuit.
Of course you'd have to figure out how to sheild it and how much
sheilding would be needed.
A constant heating rate - with only the mass flow rate under control -
you'd have a specific impulse/thrust relation - a simple cam system
would figure out the mass flow rate given the thrust level called for
BradGuth
Mook box that hasn't one clue about how to constructively or much less
deductively go about promoting any idea other than his own.
Thanks for all the usual information that's even somewhat
constructive, along with your profound nayism as noted, that is
clearly insurmountable.
. - Brad Guth
> of production of radium but judging by ...
>
> read more ≫
I'd top-posted for the benefit of others.
. - BG
BradGuth
Thanks for that constructive information, that's at least suggesting
as to the potential energy density worth of Rn222. Now all we have to
do is suck up all the spare radium on Earth (unless you'd rather just
leave it laying around) and create that LRn222 breeder reactor that'll
help us kick ion butt, and not that other radioactive ions couldn't be
utilized on behalf of ion thrusters.
Seems most anything that can be laser vaporized into ions is also a
worthy alternative, although it seems the more radioactive the
better. Possibly a Rn222 pumped laser cannon, as an ion thruster
might be worth our doing.
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
That's certainly a whole lot better contribution than most of your
previous efforts at tanking most every other topic that wasn't
originated within your mindset.
As everyone else on Earth knows, ion thrusters are not the primary
method of achieving LEO, or even necessarily suited for the likes of
any substantial moon related mission. Sadly, you can't seem to get it
right without going willie.moo postal.
Of going interplanetary and especially of interstellar treks is where
ions take a shine to thrusting things along, at the least amount of
applied energy except for those radioactive ions acting as the rocket
fuel, because them radioactive produced ions are certainly
representing a great deal of stored but otherwise of a use-it or lose-
it form of thrust capable energy.
. - Brad Guth
On Apr 13, 11:16 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> of production of radium but judging by ...
>
> read more ≫
Top-posted for the benefit of others.
. - BG
Willie...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Free electron lasers require very high speed electons to operate, a
free ion laser made with alpha particles travelling at 12,000 km/
sec? That's a tough one.
There are a lot of details in this radon system that you've got to
figure out. The only way to 'breed' radon is wait for Uranium 238 to
break down, that takes 4.5 billion years as I said earlier.
Fortunately there is a bunch of uranium all over the solar system.
What you need to do is figure out how much radium is available to
collect out there over a 10 year period - and figure out the size of
the vehicle you can run with that.
As a power source...if my numbers are correct;
7.3 kW per gram,of radon
7.3 MW per kg of radon,
7.3 GW per metric ton of radon,
7.3 TW per kiloton of radon
Alpha particles heat a working fluid, that turns a turbine, for direct
drive, or electricity production - 40% overall efficiency. Water
instead of hydrogen. A steam rocket would have a rather low thrust
given the temperature constraints - unless you got clever with
handling the heat fluxes by directing alpha particles with fields and
whatnot.
The world would need something like four kilotons of radium to replace
all fuels to keep it supplied in radon gas - which requires 20 million
tons of radium chloride in solution in collectors out there. Once
it was collected, with a half life of 1,600 years, you'd be set.
You'd need to package these radon gas heater things in little
cannisters and replace them every other day - AND NO LEAKS ANYWHERE!
Or people get real sick real fast.
I don't think there's enough Uranium 238 in the solar system to do
this. And remember, even a small nuclear pulse rocket uses thousands
of trillions of watts. So, they totally outclass this system.
One thing to look for might be naturally occurring radon vents - that
should be easy to detect from orbit. A water filled cavern covering a
big deposit of pitchblend would form a natural radon separator - so,
that might be an interesting possibility. Maybe drilling for radon
pockets.
Uranium ores should be similar on other planets and moons, so once
you've explored a place, you could find some somewhere.you'd be set.
Willie...@gmail.com
>
> read more >>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
some things are insurmountable. The Earth only has so much radium.
Radon only puts out a specific energy rate and no more. Enron showed
you could promote any damn fool idea. That didn't make right, proper
or legal. I presume you want to do something that works. That means
you've got to take into account the way reality really is. Reality
doesn't care about your ideologies or desires. Its up to us to
figure out how things really work and build things that really work.
Fact is, radon 222 may be an interesting specialty nuclear source,
just as hydrogen peroxide might be an interesting battery
replacement. woopee.
Actually, 10 milligrams of radon gas can be made to generate 73 watts
thermal, and peraps 30 watts electrical - enough to power a laptop -
for four days. With a capactior bank, or a small lithium ion battery
- you might get away with 5 milligrams and let it run a week... with
the battery charging when the machine is turned off. Then you throw
it away and buy another.
The real killer will be shelf life of the radon. They'd spoil faster
than lettuce! lol. And you'd need special containers to ship them
safely. And you'd need to dispose of them safely as well.
Polonium would be more stable. You could take a week or two to run
through the supply chain. But, you'd need 160 milligrams of the metal
to replace the 5 milligrams of gas. It would last two years and then
be replaced - along with the battery pack which would be shot by
then. The lithium ion battery could form a radiative sheild. People
would likely spend $200 or more for a 2 year nuclear power source for
their laptop. The historical negative publicity surrounding all
things nuclear, would get you immediate PR and with the right sort of
ad campaign, could be spun positive - with some sort of 'bad boy'
image.
2 billion laptops - $100 per year - $200 billion per year revenue
stream. 1 billion power units each with 160 mg of Polonium - 100
metric tons of Polonium per year.
This is a good place to start in the market. I think you can easily
get that much Polonium from the world's pitchblende that supplies the
world with 41,000 tons of Uranium.
Like the old Kodak camera that required you to send it back to the
factory to develop the pictures, You'd sell it with the computer's
first through the manufacturers, and the power unit would be a lease
for $200 that they'd sign, and pay $2,000 if they lost it. To buy a
new unit they bring an old unit into the store and another $200. All
spent units get sent back to the factory to be reprocessed into new
units.
All units have RFID and can be tracked over the internet, and by a
handheld unit. As an added bonus, there's a stolen computer
recovery service that comes with the power pack.
I'm sure other things can be turned into something good.
BradGuth
I'm not exclusive to using Rn222, but Earth seems to have way more
than it's fair share of it, and it's killing off at a fairly good
pace. So, why not gather up all the spare radium and put its Rn222 to
good use. Possibly as LRn222 stored at zero K might start making this
interesting. After all, under special conditions we've stopped
photons dead in their tracks, making such stored photons available on
demand, so to speak.
BTW, like terrestrial 3He, there's Rn222 just about everywhere. Of
course, we don't have to capture or much less utilize either of
those. Our moon should be downright loaded with radium deposits, much
of which existing near or directly on the surface.
. - Brad Guth
Willie...@gmail.com
grams of TNT equivalent yeild per milligram of LiD. So, a surface
with a strong neutron source vapor deposited on its surface, like
Radium mixe with beryllium covered with a layer of a few micrograms of
Li6 - should make a nice heater that has far more energy density than
radon and lasts longer.
That is, the low reaction rate of Radium could be overcome by boosting
the energy output with Lithium-6 nuclear fuel.
Lithium 6 can be separated before the Lithium ion battery
manufacture, and the whole thing can be called a fusion battery!
lol.
No pressure or temperature is needed to produce this fusion reaction -
just neutrons and Lithium-6.
Of course, tritum released along with the helium produces energetic
electrons. These could be made to interact with beryllium to produce
energetic neutrons - to multiply the effect of the radium. The radon
would be there too - and would add a little to the overall heating.
Here you'd keep the radium/beryllium neutron source and replace
Lithium 6 foils or Lithium-6/Deuteride foils around it every 2 to 3
years. Here you wouldn't need a battery since the neturons don't
change their output much over that time radium having a 1,600 life
span.
Also, you'd have a sort of reactor, since Lithium 6 produces alpha
particles as well, which can be converted into neutrons by interacting
with Beryllium which is a way to modulate power as well..
4.184 GJ = 1 ton TNT
4.184 MJ = 1 kg TNT
4.184 KJ = 1 gram TNT
So, 1 mg of Li6D = 60 grams TNT = 251.04 KJ when reacted in this way.
So a 30 watt continuous power supply, operating at 40% efficiency uses
a 75 watt thermal source, which consumes 1 mg every 3,347.2 seconds.
298.75 nanograms per second or 9.428 grams per year when generating
at a continuous rate. At 100% neutron utilization (which is high)
you'd neet 30 quadrillion reactions per second to sustain this rate.
Most neutron sources produce 1 billion neutrons per second, and cost
$10,000.
I'm not expert at this, but when you put several power cycles into one
device,efficiencies drop off rather quickly, so I'd have to look at
this in more detail with the right analytical tools which I don't have
handy right now.
Instead of 10,000s of tons of Radium in special ground based Radon
extractors, by using a more clever approach, you might end up with
only 10s of tons of Radium, acting as sparkers for a lithium-6 neutron
energy multiplier - and get far more bang for each kg of radium used
this way.
By the way, in one of my earlier posts I said helium 3 is not a good
energy source because its harder to fuse (with itself) than Deuterium
+ Tritium. I was right in this assertion,but in looking at the
neutron cross sections, I just realized that Helium 3 can absorb a
neutron and produce Helium 4 plus energy. This can be done at room
temperature and WOULD make Helium 3 a rather interesting fuel, but no
more interesting than Lithium 6 which is produced in very large
quantities. So, to that extent I was wrong in my earlier analysis of
Helium 3. So, Helium 3 could be used with a radioisotopic source of
neutrons like Radium Beryllium mix - and make a dandy fuel. OR an
energy multiplier for a small nuclear reactor set up as a neutron
source. But no more so than Lithium 6.
That's what I'd like to close on here - a small nuclear reactor, built
as a neutron source, to drive the Lithium-6 neutron reaction - which
multiplies the output 60 million to 1. Here you have a controllable
neutron source AND a controllable fusion multiplier.
This brings me back to the dandy little theta pinch unit made of a
tiny fiber of uranium 235 or plutonium - situated at the center of a
lithium 6 deuteride pellet. You have the 3 parts, the fiber, the
lithium deuteride pellet, and a big ass capacitor. Automatically
assemble the device, and fire it into a chamber with a rail gun, while
charging the capacitor. The capacitor discharges into the fiber, and
squeezes the fiber to very high densities, enough to detonate the tiny
speck of uranium, producing a flood of neutrons. Those neutrons are
captured by the Lithium 6 which detonates, heating the material
surrounding the sphere - backed by a beryllium shell, which reflects
neutrons back inside increasing yeild. A 100 gram unit produces a 6
tons TNT equivalent yeild. An 8 cylinder 'disc' craft described
elsewhere, would produce 360 tons TNT yeild jet - lol. with only a
few micrograms of fissile reaction products. 6 kg of Li6D per second.
ah well.. Compressed Lithium 6 changes its cross section.
Photoneutrons can be produced in a collimated beam if the photons are
collimated. Yeild is 5% or so. So, use some sort of radioisotope
source of high energy electrons - or gamma ray laser using electrons/
positrons - and send burst of photoneutrons from a beryllium target to
a Lithium-6 deuteride target in the chamber - to detonate it without
fissilereaction products in the exhaust.
A gamma ray laser in each of the 8 chambers - could also be reoriented
and down shifted to produce an interesting laser beam for defensive or
asteroidal deflection applications - at the cost of engine output.
Willie...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
A nuclear pulse ship operating with very high exhaust speed and
reasonably high thrust, can maintain constant gee all the way to Mars
- and go there in 2 to 4 days. A similar maneuver from Earth to Moon
would take 3 hours each way.
Nuclear pulse ships can be rather large - as large as supertanker on
Earth's ocean. They can be made of common stuff, since the energy
density is so high, they can be made of steel like ocean going ships,
and rather heavily made - a definite cost savings.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29
Somewhere between midrange and super orions we have something the size
of today's cargo ships. Their costs are such that a ton of material
can be carted in them for $10 per day with adequate profit.
To support someone minimally anywhere, including air water food and
filters, requires about 1 ton per person per year. To support someone
in style, i.e. present US per capita consumption rate, requires 4 tons
per person per year. To support someone millionaire style, requires
20 tons per person per year.
A ship with a 100,000 tons payload travelling 3 times a day to the
moon, can support 109.7 million minimally, 27.4 million in style, and
5.4 as millionaires. There are 9.5 million millionaires in the world.
This is with ONE ship!!!
Why? Because the moon is only 3 hours a day. Its like having a
ferry service from LA to one of the islands off the coast.
60 such ships could support 6.6 billion people on the moon minimally,
(everyone now on Earth) 1.6 billion on the moon in style, and 300
million as millionaires - the current population of the United States
- completely with zero input from lunar resources. Add lunar
resources, and you get huge leverage..
A ship with a 100,000 ton payload travelling to Mars and back once a
week, delivers 14,285 tons a day and supports 5.2 million people
minimally, 1.3 million in style, and 260,000 as milliionaires.
1,200 such ships (and there are over 3,000 large ships on today's
oceans) you support 6.6 bilion people on Mars minimally, 1.6 billion
people on Mars in style, and 300 million millionaries on Mars.
Create one ship, establish a lunar city, supply it with the ship,
create the first bank of luna, and a lunar republic as a tax haven,
provide global wireless internet access and a habitat for anyone who
has $2,000,000 or more - in lieu of interest, on the first $2,000,000
in deposits, and no taxes whatever, and you'd get 5.4 million
millionaires in no time with a combined worth of $20 trillion on
deposit.
$10 trillion the bank keeps the interest on supports the construction
and public services for 5.4 million habitats for 20 million people and
their families. At 5% internal rate of return, $10 trillion earns
$500 billion per year - for the bank - which is connected with the
Republic. Everyone else pays rents which is a sliding scale that
drops to zero as their bank balance approaches $2 million. All
transactions are electronic and backed by commodities produced on
Luna. Each millionaire uses 20 tons of material from Earth each
year, and the ship carries it - that's 108 million tons. At $400 per
ton - that's $40 billion dollars to support the transport system.
So, this is what you could do with one ship and some infrastructure to
build up habitats on the moon.
Space colonies in orbit spin to produce 1 gee gravity and an earthlike
environment can be built inside a cylinder. A 'grounded' cylinder can
be contemplated, supported on 1 ege by a maglev system and rotated to
push everyone outward. because there's 1/6th gravity on the moon,
you've got a slight angle to everything. 5/6th gavity outward, and
1/6th gravity down.produces a 9.57 degree slope 'down' So, walking up
and down the street would be like climbing a gentle hill in San
Francisco. Houses would be angled like that, as would cross streets.
At the base, moving sidewalks form rings, that allow people to walk
off the rim of the cylinder and onto the lunar surface while changing
speed and vertical direction - and gravity. I imagine a cylinder set
inside a large stationary sphere, with maglev rings at the base
holding the whole thing, and a smaller maglev ring at the top,
stabilizing everything. Along the central axis of the cylinder, is
fountain that shoots straight up out of a low gravity pond at the
center. The sprays are angled to hit a back stop at the far end of
the cylinder, and there is a constant fall of water at the far end.
This forms a cylindrical river - or channel, where people can swim at
a beach at the top - and the channel flows down the gentle slope into
holding ponds on the cylinder at the base of the hill. There
fountains shoot the water over the heads of people on the moving
sidewalks, into the central fountain.
This system does several things.
1. As people and equipment move around the cylinder, water jets, and
water movement in ponds and holding tanks, (gravity fed) maintain
dynamic balance.
2. The water moisturizes and purifies the air.while assisting in the
movement of air throughout the dome.
3. Its a public asset - public beaches and swimming areas are
provided..
4. It provides a pleasant visual and auditory backdrop to the system
Around the base of the cylinder is the low gravity district. This is
mostly business related centers, and these are low rise around the
central pond - mostly public buildings - and high rise on the
'downside' of the cylinder -
A sphere 1 km in diameter supports a cylinder 707 m in diameter and
707 m tall.with a surface area of 1.57 sq km (157 hectares) - with
30,000 people living on the cylinder's residential space - assuming
the same density as Manhattan, Paris, London or Tokyo. 6 million
people are supported by 200 such spheres - supplied by the one ship
described. A circular area 64 km in radius, has the requisite number
of spheres interconnected with a spaceport some distance removed from
this collection. A hexagonal array of multi-level maglev tracks
exposed to the vacuum provide convenient high speed service throughout
the city - with an 'outerbelt' ringing the city and connecting to 0.5
km diameter industrial spheres beyond. Speed can range as high as 905
km/hr and trip times in the automated system are guaranteed to take no
more than 9 minutes each way. Its an 18 minute ride from the
spaceport to the city, and speeds can reach nearly escape velocity!
Gee forces are limited to 1/10th earth normal. Cabin orientation
changes when accelerating either linearly or laterally to maintain
normal force in the cabin at all times. Parallel to the multi-lane
multi-level maglev tracks are pressurized moving sidewalks (read the
roads must roll) that interconnect the spheres at a more leisurely
pace.
This city - after the construction of the vehicle described - and the
industrial infrastructure to support it - in a period of six years -
is erected in an additional 6 years at a cost of $1,800 billion. As
mentioned when fully populated under the funding scheme $500 billion
per year is earned, along with another $40 billion per year in
shipping revenues.
Anyone else pays $90,000 per year for public services maximum. This
is paid as a $250 per day fee. This fee is reduced by $1 per day for
every $10,000 in daily balances maintained at the First Bank of Luna.
No interest is paid. When $2.5 million is held on deposit there is no
fee for service. For each $10,000 held in excess of $2.5 million, $1
per day is paid into your account.
You may have as many children on the moon as you can get licenses
for. In order to obtain a license you must pass a test and maintain
currency on this test every three years. Failure to pass this test
causes its rescheduling in 90 days after a mandatory parenting course
is taken.
In addition to passing a parenting course, prospective parents must
show an ability to deposit an extra $300 per day into a savings
account for their child for a period of 19 years. - which is a little
more than $2.08 million in deposits over this period, and with
interest, $2.5 million by the time the child turns 19 years of age.
At that point, they must graduate at the undergraduate level, in
college courses, and pass a citizens test. At that point, they gain
access to their funds and are free to manage them as they see fit.
Approved financial services advisors will advise them for 6 years in
the management of their funds - until the turn 25. Their parents or
other relative may do this instead, if the parent or relative passes a
financial management test and agrees to public oversight and
accounting. The child then becomes and adult citizen of luna and
never pays taxes on his job, business or activities ever, and doesn't
have to file income tax forms or anything of that nature.
Children that fail to graduate and pass the required courses, have
their funds held in escrow and cannot work or invest orborrow against
funds, until their courses are passed. They must attend special
courses for which they pay $50 per day from their escrow account - and
they have up to 3 years to meet the standards.
Those that do not meet the standards shall have their remaining funds
held by the State or a responsible relative and shall be required to
work or invest but shall be supported by measures appropriate to
their deficits in the least restrictive enviroment possible. Parents
or relatives who wish to act as caregivers must pass appropriate
tests, and arrange for the eventual transfer of services over the
remainder of their natural lives to appropriate Lunar agencies.
New off world arrivals must pay $250 per day for each adult and $300
per day for each child under the age of 12 into an escrow account.
Children over the age of 12 must pay $600 per day into their account,
and be placed on a special accelerated training course in school. All
children must attend school 300 days per year 9 hours a day. Parent
may arrange leaves for their children for family vacations and sick
days up to 60 days a year.
All parents with children arriving on Luna must also take parenting
courses and pass a parenting test. They have up to 18 months to
successfully complete this program. Those who fail this program will
have a parenting advisor assigned to each child and review where the
parents are failing and assist them to meet luna standards.
Air water food and filters along with housing furnishings and all
public services are provided for all at these prices. Those with the
means to do so may apply for housing furnishing and other credits and
apply them toward the purchase of luxury housing luxury furnishing and
so forth. Health and other insurance is provided within these rates.
While there is no explicit minimum pay, most jobs pay $50 per hour or
more and most citizens work 60 hours per week, since few below this
level without assets, can meet the daily air water food and filter
fees. (aw3f). With no taxes that's $3,000 per week per person..
Daily fees in a week add up to $1,750 per working person. A family of
3 - two parents and one child with no savings - pay $5,600 a week and
earn $6,000 per week. Which is the working poor on the moon. The
child emerges with $2.5 million a college education and likely earns
$100 per day or more when he leaves home. Assuming the parents
continue working, at the same rate, with no bonuses and no other
investments, they now earn $6,000 per week, but have $3,500 per week
paid out, allowing $2,500 to spare. If as is the custom a child pays
half his income toward his parents until he is 25 - the parents can
save $5,500 per week, and in 6 years $2.2 million is accumulated.
For a family that has gone through all this, both parents are relieved
of daily fees at the same rate for as long as they remain married. If
they are divorced, the total balance will be split between the
parents, and if they remarry, the deposits will be added together and
split equally if divorced again. Marriages that last less than four
years, will be split along lines proportionate to their starting
balance ratios. Death of both parents will be treated as a divorce
with respect to the surviving parent and the assets split among all
offspring. There is no probrate on the moon and no taxes on
inheritance as there is no taxes beyond the daily service fees
charged. .
By the time the child reaches 25 -he or she is a free fully funded
Lunar Citizen.
A second generation family assuming both parents are working earning
$100 per hour 60 hours per week - the family collects $12,000 per
week, and have no fees, living at minimal standards. They can have up
to 4 children without drawing down their combined balance of $5
million. Alternatively, they may pay $2,100 per week, and have $9,900
per week combined income to increase their savings, or buy luxury
items. Most in this situation elect additional formal post-graduate
education.
Single people earning less than $50 per hour with no children, must
work enough hours to cover their $250 fee. So, someone earning $25
per hour, must work at least 10 hours per day every day, if they get
no bonuses, profit sharing, piece work etc., or have no other
investments. Since even low level workers generate $500,000 per year
tax free for their employer- it is not uncomming for even low level
workers to earn $100 per hour and work 60 hours per week. Higher
valued workers earn more.
In this way a high level of public service is maintained for all
people regardless of economic position, and clear pathways are
established so that even the lowest paid lowest skilled jobs afford
progress over time.
Visitors to the moon will pay a $250 per day fee, and $300 per day fee
for all children. Before arriving off world visitors will apply for a
special visa stating the term of their stay and deposit with the bank
of luna an amount equal to the number of days of their stay times $250
per day for each adult and $300 per day for each child under the age
of 19. Children unaccompanied by an adult must deposit $600 per day
per child and have a qualified adult supervisor either nominated by
the parent, or assigned by Lunar personnell to monitor the safety and
activities of the child. All persons arriving on Luna from off world,
regardless of age, must obtain a valid entry visa for the term of
their stay. These visas are obtained by doing the following;
(1) paying the fees already spelled out for each person.
(2) paying for travel to the moon and back to their planet of origin
(3) paying for an approved 3 day 'moon survival course' on their
planet of origin
(this may be included in your travel plan - see your agent for
details)
(4) passing an approved moon survival test given by Lunar personnel
on your planet of origin.
Then a lunar visa will be issued immediately once electronic vouchers
are exchanged with the bank of luna confirming all fees and services.
So, a day trip to the moon and back over a 24 hour period for a single
adult would entail a $250 services fee, a $400 round trip ticket to
the moon and back (from Earth) which includesa 3 day survival course,
and passing a 2 hour test following the course. - $650 total for the
round trip and overnight stay.
For a family of 3 with a 4 year old child, staying for 3 days on the
moon, would entail paying $750 for each adult and $900 for the child -
for a total of $1,650 for all fees - and an age appropriate training
and testing procedure for the 4 year old, and training and testing for
the adults, including a lunar parenting quick course - included in the
price of their tickets which total $1,200 for the 3 of them. a total
of $2,850 for the 3 of them for 3 days and nights.
Each may upgrade at the announced luxury rates available at each
hotel. All lodging food air water meet mnimum lunar safety
reliability and approved quality standard. (equivalent to a 3 star
hotel on Earth)
A single person who seeks a 90 day trial citizen - arranges a job on
the moon, and arranges his pay to be transferred. Say the trial pay
is 40 hours per week at $30 per hour. This is $1,200 per week - with
a rise to 60 hours per week and $60 per hour upon completion of
training and quality review. Their cost is $1,750 per week,and they
earn $1,200 - say they allocate $750 of their pay to the fees, so
there is a $1,000 per week shortfall. They arrange a 12.857 week
(90 day) trial period. So, they deposit $12,857 with the bank of
lunar to cover this charge. Their ticket round trip is $400 - so a
total of $13,257 is required of someone who takes a job on the moon.
Typically, most companies after the first week of training, give a
bonus up to $15,000 to cover this expense. The same training and
testing program is required to obtain a 90 day work visa.
A single person, say a musician, with no job prospects wants a 30 day
work visa. They must meet the same ticketing training and testing
requirement (3tr) - and deposit a minimum $7,500 at the bank of luna.
They may play for tips at one of the local hotels. They can easily
earn $1,000 per night in tips. As they make deposits with the bank of
luna, their daily rate drops, and their visa is automatically
extended. So, after 30 days of $1,000 per night fees, all deposited
with the first bank of luna, the single person may extend their visa
for another 30 days by allocating another $7,500 to the visa fee, and
perhaps elect higher luxury accmodations, allowing them to bank$500
per night. leaving $22,500 on deposit. - every month they accumulate
an additional $20,000 - in 72 months - 6 years - they have earned the
right to become a full lunar citizen by placing their money in escrow,
and agreeing to take training to pass the test - called settler's
test, which is similar to the test required of college graduates.
They have up to 3 years to complete this process. They are free to
leave at any time and take their savings with interest with them
released from escrow, or continue to work on 30 day visas and apply
for citizenship at any time.
A person with $10 million transfers this to the first bank of luna and
applies for citizenship for their mate and one child. They are
pregnant with another child. The person has a sizeable income earned
doing business on the moon, and they allocate $7.5 million for the
existing family members to citizenship escrow, and $2.5 million is
free and earns interest. The child when it is born, they pay $300 per
day and continue to do so throughout the child's growth and
development. The older child is already fully funded, and undergoes
appropriate training and has his fund transfered to his own account.
His parents waive the one-half income requirement when he gets a
job.. The same ticketing and planet of origin training are required
before departure. They arrive as fully paid up citizens of Luna with
all rights and privileges. The person establishes company offices by
buying and erecting a dome and paying fees appropriate to that (which
is available under a different circular entitled DOING BUSINESS ON
LUNA.
.
Willie...@gmail.com
At the center of the 64 km diameter circle of 200 spheres, there are 7
spheres in a hexagonal array set apart from the other 193 spheres.
These spheres the seven sisters are 2 km in diameter and each has a
cylinder of 624 hectares - almost twice the size of central park. The
central sphere is a park and nature preserve. The low gravity section
houses significant public buildings in the seven sisters - including
lunar hospital, lunar public library, lunar government offices, lunar
stock exchange, lunar university, and the first bank of luna
headquarters. All space faring originates here whether arriving or
departing and the customs house is here..
The six daughters surrounding the central sphere - house additional
parklands each dedicated to a different terran environment - in five.
The sixth daughter houses a carnival, bandstand and beach, on a 24
hectare pier with the solar systems largest ferris wheel, and only
multi-gravity roller coaster - and is surrounded by 600 hectares of
deep water complete with marine life and the largest beach on the
moon. It is the largest body of free water off terra and houses the
only school of dolphins off Earth and the only whales off Earth..
There are low gravity fireworks displays every night. All parks are
open 24 hours a day 7 days a week.
BradGuth
As per usual, we'll likely have to dig up and revive Einstein in order
to decode some of what your brain just spewed out, but at least it's
looking constructive and otherwise informative.
Of various nuclear detonation options and of otherwise utilizing
radioactive ions that'll be going like hell away from that emitter of
said ions is what seems entirely doable as is, but if it's the least
bit outside the box of whatever's currently invested, as into those
more conventional methods of thrusting it's probably not going to
happen, at least not of any time soon.
Of course going fast is perhaps only a third of the problem, because
slowing down along with the pull of gravity making that retro-
thrusting a whole lot less effective is perhaps representing the other
2/3 of the package deal. The exception would be coasting into the
moon's L1 at just one meter per second, as such wouldn't require all
that much reserve thrust for bringing a great deal of mass to a halt,
and if the timing of this deployment were accomplished exactly right,
perhaps the moon's L1 arrival at 0.1 m/s should be doable.
. - Brad Guth
Willie...@gmail.com
gee force of 0.986 gravities radially are needed or 9.682 m/s/s
acceleration
A cylinder with 353.6 m radius spinning at a speed of 58.513 m/sec is
needed.or in more conventional terms 130 mph! One rotation every
37.97 seconds - less than 2 rpm. 125 strips 1/2 meter wide, each one
moving 0.5681 m/sec slower the the one before it - brings people
moving on the cylinder to a stop by walking 62.5 meters. Here is a
table that gives the speed, the radius and the height of each of those
125 strops - a small arc that dips down 30 m and inward 35 meters. It
starts 20 meters above the base of the cylinder, and stays from 23 to
7 meters inside the 500 meter radius of the spherical pressure vessel
that contains the entire system. Using this set of walkways, one can
walk right onto the high gravity section from the low gravity section
and remain upright throughout. Once the high gravity section has been
entered,it will seem like walking up a 9.6 degree slope to arrive at
the top.
At the top another series of strips bend outward 75 meters before the
top end, after first taking escalators down below the top channel
river and beach. and when the top strips are stationary beyond the
bottom of the cylinder, you arrive at the top of the outer towers in
the outer low gravity business section looking out on the lunar plains
700 m (2,170 m) above the lunar surface (assuming the sphere's are not
counter sunk into the soil for radiation protection).
Cylinder Base Sidewalk Speeds and Details
m/sec Aradial Avertical Asum angle dR Radius Hght
58.513 9.683 1.637 9.820 9.594 0.0833 353.52 0.49
57.945 9.498 1.637 9.638 9.777 0.0849 353.43 0.99
57.377 9.315 1.637 9.457 9.966 0.0865 353.35 1.48
56.809 9.133 1.637 9.279 10.159 0.0882 353.26 1.97
56.241 8.954 1.637 9.102 10.359 0.0899 353.17 2.46
55.673 8.776 1.637 8.927 10.564 0.0917 353.08 2.95
55.104 8.600 1.637 8.754 10.775 0.0935 352.98 3.44
54.536 8.426 1.637 8.583 10.992 0.0953 352.89 3.94
53.968 8.254 1.637 8.414 11.216 0.0973 352.79 4.43
53.400 8.083 1.637 8.247 11.447 0.0992 352.69 4.92
52.832 7.914 1.637 8.082 11.684 0.1013 352.59 5.41
52.264 7.747 1.637 7.918 11.929 0.1034 352.49 5.90
51.696 7.582 1.637 7.756 12.181 0.1055 352.38 6.38
51.128 7.418 1.637 7.597 12.442 0.1077 352.27 6.87
50.560 7.257 1.637 7.439 12.710 0.1100 352.16 7.36
49.992 7.097 1.637 7.283 12.987 0.1124 352.05 7.85
49.423 6.938 1.637 7.129 13.273 0.1148 351.94 8.33
48.855 6.782 1.637 6.977 13.567 0.1173 351.82 8.82
48.287 6.627 1.637 6.827 13.872 0.1199 351.70 9.31
47.719 6.475 1.637 6.678 14.186 0.1225 351.58 9.79
47.151 6.324 1.637 6.532 14.511 0.1253 351.45 10.27
46.583 6.174 1.637 6.388 14.846 0.1281 351.32 10.76
46.015 6.027 1.637 6.245 15.193 0.1310 351.19 11.24
45.447 5.881 1.637 6.105 15.551 0.1341 351.06 11.72
44.879 5.737 1.637 5.966 15.922 0.1372 350.92 12.20
44.311 5.595 1.637 5.830 16.305 0.1404 350.78 12.68
43.742 5.455 1.637 5.695 16.702 0.1437 350.64 13.16
43.174 5.316 1.637 5.562 17.112 0.1471 350.49 13.64
42.606 5.179 1.637 5.432 17.537 0.1507 350.34 14.12
42.038 5.044 1.637 5.303 17.976 0.1543 350.18 14.59
41.470 4.911 1.637 5.177 18.431 0.1581 350.03 15.07
40.902 4.780 1.637 5.052 18.903 0.1620 349.86 15.54
40.334 4.650 1.637 4.929 19.391 0.1660 349.70 16.01
39.766 4.522 1.637 4.809 19.897 0.1702 349.53 16.48
39.198 4.396 1.637 4.691 20.422 0.1745 349.35 16.95
38.630 4.271 1.637 4.574 20.965 0.1789 349.17 17.42
38.061 4.149 1.637 4.460 21.529 0.1835 348.99 17.88
37.493 4.028 1.637 4.348 22.113 0.1882 348.80 18.34
36.925 3.909 1.637 4.238 22.719 0.1931 348.61 18.81
36.357 3.792 1.637 4.130 23.347 0.1981 348.41 19.26
35.789 3.676 1.637 4.024 23.999 0.2034 348.21 19.72
35.221 3.563 1.637 3.921 24.674 0.2087 348.00 20.18
34.653 3.451 1.637 3.819 25.375 0.2143 347.78 20.63
34.085 3.340 1.637 3.720 26.103 0.2200 347.56 21.08
33.517 3.232 1.637 3.623 26.857 0.2259 347.34 21.52
32.948 3.125 1.637 3.528 27.639 0.2319 347.11 21.97
32.380 3.021 1.637 3.436 28.450 0.2382 346.87 22.41
31.812 2.918 1.637 3.345 29.291 0.2446 346.62 22.84
31.244 2.816 1.637 3.257 30.163 0.2512 346.37 23.27
30.676 2.717 1.637 3.172 31.066 0.2580 346.11 23.70
30.108 2.619 1.637 3.088 32.002 0.2650 345.85 24.13
29.540 2.523 1.637 3.007 32.971 0.2721 345.58 24.55
28.972 2.429 1.637 2.929 33.974 0.2794 345.30 24.96
28.404 2.336 1.637 2.853 35.011 0.2869 345.01 25.37
27.836 2.246 1.637 2.779 36.084 0.2945 344.72 25.77
27.267 2.157 1.637 2.708 37.192 0.3022 344.41 26.17
26.699 2.070 1.637 2.639 38.335 0.3101 344.10 26.56
26.131 1.984 1.637 2.572 39.515 0.3181 343.79 26.95
25.563 1.901 1.637 2.508 40.729 0.3262 343.46 27.33
24.995 1.819 1.637 2.447 41.980 0.3344 343.13 27.70
24.427 1.739 1.637 2.388 43.264 0.3427 342.78 28.06
23.859 1.661 1.637 2.332 44.583 0.3510 342.43 28.42
23.291 1.584 1.637 2.278 45.934 0.3593 342.07 28.77
22.723 1.509 1.637 2.226 47.317 0.3676 341.71 29.11
22.155 1.436 1.637 2.178 48.729 0.3758 341.33 29.44
21.586 1.365 1.637 2.131 50.168 0.3840 340.95 29.76
21.018 1.296 1.637 2.087 51.632 0.3920 340.55 30.07
20.450 1.228 1.637 2.046 53.118 0.3999 340.15 30.37
19.882 1.162 1.637 2.007 54.623 0.4077 339.75 30.66
19.314 1.098 1.637 1.971 56.144 0.4152 339.33 30.94
18.746 1.036 1.637 1.937 57.676 0.4225 338.91 31.20
18.178 0.975 1.637 1.905 59.217 0.4296 338.48 31.46
17.610 0.916 1.637 1.876 60.761 0.4363 338.04 31.70
17.042 0.859 1.637 1.848 62.304 0.4427 337.60 31.94
16.474 0.804 1.637 1.823 63.842 0.4488 337.15 32.16
15.905 0.750 1.637 1.800 65.370 0.4545 336.70 32.36
15.337 0.699 1.637 1.780 66.883 0.4599 336.24 32.56
14.769 0.649 1.637 1.761 68.377 0.4648 335.77 32.75
14.201 0.601 1.637 1.743 69.848 0.4694 335.30 32.92
13.633 0.554 1.637 1.728 71.290 0.4736 334.83 33.08
13.065 0.510 1.637 1.714 72.699 0.4774 334.35 33.23
12.497 0.467 1.637 1.702 74.072 0.4808 333.87 33.36
11.929 0.426 1.637 1.691 75.404 0.4839 333.39 33.49
11.361 0.387 1.637 1.682 76.692 0.4866 332.90 33.60
10.793 0.350 1.637 1.674 77.933 0.4890 332.41 33.71
10.224 0.314 1.637 1.667 79.123 0.4910 331.92 33.80
9.656 0.281 1.637 1.661 80.260 0.4928 331.43 33.89
9.088 0.249 1.637 1.656 81.342 0.4943 330.93 33.96
8.520 0.219 1.637 1.651 82.366 0.4956 330.44 34.03
7.952 0.191 1.637 1.648 83.331 0.4966 329.94 34.09
7.384 0.165 1.637 1.645 84.234 0.4975 329.44 34.14
6.816 0.141 1.637 1.643 85.076 0.4982 328.95 34.18
6.248 0.119 1.637 1.641 85.853 0.4987 328.45 34.22
5.680 0.098 1.637 1.640 86.566 0.4991 327.95 34.25
5.112 0.080 1.637 1.639 87.213 0.4994 327.45 34.27
4.543 0.063 1.637 1.638 87.794 0.4996 326.95 34.29
3.975 0.048 1.637 1.637 88.308 0.4998 326.45 34.31
3.407 0.036 1.637 1.637 88.755 0.4999 325.95 34.32
2.839 0.025 1.637 1.637 89.134 0.4999 325.45 34.32
2.271 0.016 1.637 1.637 89.445 0.5000 324.95 34.33
1.703 0.009 1.637 1.637 89.688 0.5000 324.45 34.33
1.135 0.004 1.637 1.637 89.861 0.5000 323.95 34.33
0.567 0.001 1.637 1.637 89.965 0.5000 323.45 34.33
0.000 0.000 1.637 1.637 90.000 0.5000 322.95 34.33
Willie...@gmail.com
The terminal velocity of a parachutist on the surface of Earth before
his chute opens is;53 m/sec in the arch position, and as high as 70 m/
sec n the 'dive' position. This is the speed where the air drag of a
falling body equalt the gravity force.
On the moon the gravity force is 1/6th that of Earth. Thus terminal
velocity is the square root of 1/6th or 40.82% of what it is on Earth
or 22 m/sec to 29 m/sec (50 mph to 65 mph)
This means that by blowing air into a tube in such a way from orifices
along the length of the tube's interior, that causes a wind to
constantly flow upward at a speed of 27 m/sec (for a down tube) and 31
m/sec (for an up tube) then a simple alternative to an elevator/
escalator/stairs can be contemplated.
Also, by arcing the tube from vertical to horizontal, and placing
rollers along the bottom that rotate at an appropriate speed, - that
feed into a moving side walk moving at 29 mph - equal to the wind
speed - then vertical drop tubes naturally become launchers at either
end, for moderate speed (65 mph) pedestrian traffic. Many orifices
along the tube length (think air hockey table) keep persons from
hitting the tube wall at these speeds. The tubes are made of a double
layer of transparent PET film, coated with aluminum layers to reduce
harsh lighting conditions during the lunar day.
One set of tubes travel to the nearest neighbor sphere, at the 700 m
level at the top of the 'drop tubes.' One set of tubes travel
radially at the 300 m level at the base of the drop tubes. The 400 m
drop tube takes 200 seconds or 3 minutes to navigate in either the up
or down direction - and only 40 seconds to reach the other sphere's
drop tube. A circular torus allows travellers to maintain their speed
and 'blow-by' the nearest neighbor and take any of six radial arms to
neighboring spheres, including going back to where you came from - in
about 2 minutes. It takes a half hour to 'walk' across the city this
way, or 15 minutes to 'walk' from the center to the periphery. You
can also hire a maglev if you are in a hurry and go from the center to
the periphery in 4 minutes, or 'cross town' in 8 minutes - after
waiting for the vehicle getting in, and programming it. The maglevs
which are for hire, are typically used by tourists. The drop tubes
which are free and provide a backup air handling capacity between
spheres, are free.
.
Willie...@gmail.com
Cooling radon gas will not alter its rate of decay one bit. One
process (cooling) deals with electrical forces between atoms. Another
process (radioactive decay0 deals with nuclear forces at the center of
each atom.
Also, while its easy to say go out and collect every speck of radium,
that would entail going out and digging up all the pitchblende, and
processing the radium out of it. A monumental task as I tried to show
in my calculaiton of the amount of U238 is needed to support 1 kg
every second of Radon gas. I did mention there are work arounds, such
as, flooding pitchblende deposits with water, and drilliong bore holes
at the high points, or looking for naturaly occuring vents.
And, even though radon and radium are easy to detect because they are
radioactive, and we can detect very low levels, and we can detect them
everywhere, and they post a health hazard everywhere, that doesn't
mean that gathering 150 atoms of radon from every milli-liter of air
would be easy. It would entail processing the ENTIRE atmosphere, and
figuring out how to grab every single one of the 150 atoms from the
hundreds of millions of trillions of atoms per milli-liter. Again, a
monumental task.
I don't know how much radium was used in the old days when watch dials
were painted. Only small amuonts are needed to paint lots of watch
dials. Unfortunately the health hazards are huge even for those small
amounts. Which brings me to the final caution - any radioactive
material used in large quantities, will pose a significant health
hazard if they spring leaks and so forth. So, that has to be taken
into account as well.
Using a neutron source with a multiplying reaction is interesting.
The most interesting thing to me is that it seem immediately doable.
One wonders why its not being done. Of course the declassified report
describing disposable chemical lasers and optics (think inkjet print
cartridge) to detonate a small amount of Deuterium Tritium mix, which
then sets Li-6 deuteride off - is a way without any radium to make
tiny clearn nuclear fusion pulse units. Those units are then inserted
in a magnetic chamber and detonated to create thrust. A multiple
chamber system provides a constant high speed jet, while chambers get
reloaded and fired again.
The moon is likely to have deposits of uranium ore that contain radium
and radon gas. Once discovered and developed, a wide range of
experimental research should be engaged in to create a wide range of
nuclear powered rocket engines, and their applications - without
worrying about polluting the Earth.
Even though processing the entire atmosphere of Earth is not feasible,
it is feasible and desireable, to process the entire atmosphere of the
Moon. It is also feasible to process the entire habitable volume of
occupied dwellings on Earth to separate out radon cryogenically
perhaps. In this way, a significant amount of the gas might be
gathered.
The 41,000 tons of Uranium made each year should produce 14.5 kg of
radium each year which produces a few grams of radon each year.
Cleaning up the air supplies as you suggest would gather perhaps 20 kg
more or less.
Looking for natural vents and collecting those,would likely produce
tons per year. Flooding pitchblende deposits and drilling boreholes
to gather radon directly,might gather tons of the gas each year -
while reducing the background radiation of Earth.
But we're talking only tons of the gas ni a year.
Radioisotopes and Neutron sources are not cheap. Californium neutron
sources that produce 1 billion neutrons per second cost over $10,000 -
to get something that produces 10 trillion neutrons per second, will
cost over $100 million at these prices. While the device is simple,
its not cheap or easy or even particularly safe.
. .
Willie...@gmail.com
the spectrum. Helium 3 plus a neutron. Lithium 6 plus a neutron.
Both produce energetic alpha particles - and those combined with other
low z materials, like deuterium, produce neutrons. So, there is a
possibility of using a very modest amount of neutrons from a
radioisotope and seeing the number grow under the right mix of
conditions - reducing the amount of radioisotope needed. Once the
'fire' has been started, the level of Deuterium can be cut back to
control the power level.
Ian Parker
The only substance suitable for spaceflight is Helium 3. It may well
be the best bet terrestrially too. The main problem with neutons is
their enormaous range in a plasma. Effectively neutrons cannot
interact with a plasma, they simply represent energy loss.
He3/D is a space propellant because all its energy is in the form of
CHARGED particles.
He3 + D -> He4 + p
p may by trapped in a magnetic field and thereby heats the plasma.
Roughly 80% of thermonuclear energy is in the form of neutrons or
protons. Most thermonuclear designs (terrestrial) posultate raising
steam created by the absorbtion of neutrons. This is NOT a good
solution for space.
An H bomb BTW is of such a size that neutrons are absorbed in the
plasma.
- Ian Parker
BradGuth
As per usual, that's all very interesting and seemingly doable stuff
as long as Mook is in charge of everything, and to merely ponder as to
what are the odds of that ever happening, seems rather astronomical.
Ion thrusters typically require a good amount of applied electron
energy for accelerating those passive ions of xenon gas, however the
already highly charged ions of radioactive isotopes are quite another
thing, that which may only need to be directed towards the exit and
final acceleration grids of each ion thruster, should by rights result
in a considerable thrust improvement per joule of applied energy. If
need be, the likes of Ra226 itself could be laser vaporized into ions,
although the Rn222 element seems far better.
With the nuclear fly-by-rocket expertise of lord all-knowing Mook,
that runs most everything as though somewhat like a black hole
(meaning everything goes in and hardly if anything usable ever comes
out unless the mindset of Mook implodes upon himself), except that our
wizard Mook extensively runs exclusively on his very own special
superiority kind of nayism so that only his ulterior mindset is what
works, and perhaps otherwise by a few others contributing on behalf of
using various controlled nuclear detonation and fusion derived
options, plus always that of my pesky notions for utilizing those
radioactive decay derived ions (such as from a cache of Ra226-->LRn222
or via any number of alternatives) that'll become a long term supply
of those nearly effortlessly directed and otherwise easily focused
ions, as directed and accelerated by the least amount of applied
electron energy, as for causing such hefty and highly charged ions to
go away from those thrust emitters at terrific velocity is what seems
entirely doable as is. Unfortunately, if it's the least bit outside
the box of whatever's currently invested, as into those more
conventional methods of thrusting is why it's probably not going to
happen, at least not of any time soon.
Fly me not quite to the moon:
Of getting large amounts of tonnage to the moon's L1 is not actually
about going fast, especially if given a lunar month per deployment
would cut the fly-by-rocket demands per tonne considerably.
Of course whenever having to go extremely fast is perhaps only a third
of the start to finish task, because slowing down along with the
advancing pull of the destination gravity that'll be making retro-
thrusting somewhat less effective is perhaps representing as much as
the other 2/3 of the package deal. The strong exception would always
be for coasting effortlessly into the moon's L1 at just one meter per
second, whereas such a gravity-null or soft destination wouldn't
require all that much reserve thrust for bringing a great deal of mass
to a halt, and if the orbital timing of this kind of deployment were
accomplished exactly right, perhaps the moon L1 arrival could become
managed at as little as 0.1 m/s, along with only minor station-keeping
adjustments for staying situated within this interactive gravity
nullified zone.
. - Brad Guth
Willie...@gmail.com
The escape velocity of the moon is 2.48 km/sec
The orbital velocity of the moon is 1.75 km/sec
Establishing a lunar tether at L1 in the Earth-Moon system according
to your figures will 'cost' 256 million tons of materials - plus
approximately an equivalent amount of chemical propellants to shipt
the 128 thousand tons of tooling and 128 thousand tons of robots which
you also say will be needed - over half a trillion tons of stuff - to
save adding 1.75 km/sec to a payload sent from Earth to Moon, and
another 1.75 km/sec to a payload sent from Moon to Earth.
The lunar tether cannot be built with any material known today - so,
that's an issue
The robots you say are needed cannot be built with any software or
theory of software known today - so that's another issue.
The lunar tether does nothing to reduce the propellant needs for the
far harder task of imparting 9.2 km/sec and 14.0 km/sec to get objects
from Earth's surface to Earth orbit and from Earth's surface to Trans-
lunar injection - when accounting for air drag and gravity losses
during launch.
So, what is a lunar tether saving us?
The 1.75 km/sec going from L1 to lunar surface
The 1.75 km/sec going from lunar surface to L1
The value of the tether is greatest when rocket performance is
weakest, and goes away as rocket performance increases.
Consider three rocket types;
Chemical rocket with Ve=4.5 km/sec
Nuclear thermal rocket with Ve=9.0 km/sec
Nuclear pulse rocket with Ve=30.0 km/sec
Advanced nuclear rocket Ve = 10,000 km/sec
Without refueling on the moon;
Vf = 3.50km/sec
u(chemical) = 1 - 1/exp(3.5/4.5) = 54.06%
u(nuclear thermal) = 1 - 1/exp(3.5/9.0) = 32.22%
u(nuclear pulse) = 1 - 1/exp(3.5/30.0) = 11.01%
u(advanced) = 1 - 1/exp(3.5/10000) = 0.035%
u(tether) = 0 = 0.00%
Assuming 12% structural fraction - then payload fraction is
u(chemical) = 100% - 54.06% - 12.00% = 33.94%--> 2.94
u(nuclear thermal) = 100% - 32.22% - 12.00% = 55.78%--> 1.79
u(nuclear pulse) = 100% - 11.01% - 12.00% = 76.99%--> 1.30
u(advanced) = 100% - 0.035% - 12.00% = 87.65% = 1.141
u(tether) = 100% - 0.00% - 12.00% = 88.00%--> 1.136
Improved flow rate due to tether
u(chemical)/u(tether) = 2.94/1.136 = 2.58 158% improved
u(nuclear thermal)/u(tether) = 1.79/1.136 = 1.57 57% improved
u(nuclear pulse)/u(tether) = 1.30/1.136 = 1.14 14% improved
u(advanced)/u(tether) = 1.141/1.136 = 1.0044 0.44%
improved
Assuming a 0.005% mass per day maintenance in perpetuity - mass flow
rate needed to break even in 60 years
chemical - 11.8 million tons per year
nuclear thermal - 32.8 million tons per year
nuclear pulse - 133.6 million tons per year
advanced - 4,248.8 million tons per year
Combine this with the fact that improved rocket performance reduces
the total cost of maintaining mass flow throughout the system, not
just at one point, and you can see that at our present stage of
development, the highest best use of ANY investment in technology, is
to improve engine performance. Once we have achieved sufficient
improvements in engine performance, that is, advanced nuclear
propulsion techniques, then we may consider improvements like tethers
- supposing the 'unobtainium' issues are resolved at that time - when
massive amounts of materials are demanded on the lunar surface. That
is, when oceans and blue skies are desired and we do not wish to
disrupt a developed surface with massive asteroidal impacts. At that
point it makes sense to use tethers.
With refueling on the moon the mass flow rats are higher still.
BradGuth
Your obvious nayism and horrified fright of utilizing the moon's L1 is
noted.
Clearly you either do not understand the most fundamental basics of
the LSE-CM/ISS, or you are simply a liar. Since you are supposedly
the one and only all-knowing wizard on Earth (though oddly as nearly
bankrupt and unemployable), as such that leaves us with your being a
certified born-again liar (just like GW Bush and company).
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
Thanks for that constructive and informative feedback, however, you're
making our all-knowing lord Mook look bad.
Bet he doesn't bother to fire off any reply to what you've just
posted.
. - Brad Guth
Willie...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
You mischaracterize what I'm saying. I just think making plans for
tethers we don't know how to build is foolish since we have a lot more
to do advancing rockets. Anyone who promotes the use of tethers over
rockets is needlessly creating roadblocks. Which is something you can
be relied upon consistently to promote.
i have said all along the L1 point is a perfect place for navigation
satellites, observation satellites, communication satellites, power
satellites at the present time and I intend to see all those in place
in my life time.
Since we can't build tethers as you describe with any known material,
nor can we build them with autonomous robots as you describe, the
point is moot until we can
The same money that you would have us invest in tethers is better
spent building nuclear thermal and nuclear pulse rockets to attain
improved rocket performance. Of course you are free to invest
whatever money you have in whatever fool project you want to promote.
When you get results materially different than expected, then you can
say we were wrong and you were right. Unless and until that happens,
you are naive to think people who take what you say seriously wouldn't
seriously and realistically analyze what you say. Rather than thank
those people, you denigrate them and tell lies about them. Shame on
you.
To recap, tethers make sense once we have developed rocket art to a
point far in advance of today's capabilities and have done the basic
research to actually build these tethers. Once the materials problems
are solved - if they ever are - at that time it will make sense to
build tethers to assist in terraforming the moon and mars and import
the materials from the outer solar system that will assist in
maintaining a free atmosphere and ocean on those worlds by importing
massive quantities of materials from the outer solar system to
maintain the water nitrogen and oxygen needed. Once that is done -and
it can be done rather quickly with the right kind of rocket technology
supporting it - moving outer solar system bodies - tethers built to
GEO and beyond from Earth, will operate with tethers built on a
terraformed moon and Mars to transfer millions of people every hour at
high speed between these worlds.
This will be half a century or more beyond today at least, and cost
trillions and trillions of dollars - and will require advanced nuclear
pulse rockets to work out.
The advanced rockets themselves cost only billions of dollars - and
provide immediate and positive returns by allowing us to settle and
develop these worlds, and our world, using a relatively smaller mass
flow rate - so we may create the great wealth needed to terraform the
moon mars mercury and venus, and erect industrial rings around each as
well as the Earth.
This will all be done with advanced nuclear pulse and laser driven
rockets.
At that point we will have the resources in place, and once we develop
the knowledge, we will build tethers in all cases, and terraform all
these worlds, and use the tether to maintain a massive flow of traffic
between worlds.
The history of space travel is the history of rocket engine
performance and materials improvements - which both lead to increased
payload fractions and lower cost of momentum.
1950s - intercontinental ballistic missiles - small suborbital
payloads
1960s - small orbital rockets - small orbiting payloads
1970s - large cislunar rockets - manned lunar payloads
at this point - investments in rockets ended, but not before designing
even larger rockets like Nova, and building even more efficient rocket
engines and testing them like NERVA, and designing even more advanced
systems like ORION. Had these been developed we would have seen the
following developments;
1980s - very large interplanetary rockets - manned mars expedition
1990s - massive nuclear pulse rockets - planetary colonization
Other ideas that have been developed over this same period and barely
acknowleged include;
Solar power satellites
Satellite networks
Space colonies
Laser powered rockets
Laser light sails
Tethers
All are worthwhile and all have their place. I have worked to advance
design of solar power satellite showing conclusively that solar pumped
free electron lasers using CPV and using large terrestrial solar panel
arrays as power recievers provide distinct and large advantage when
compared to orginal microwave concepts using conventional PV.
Further advances are possible by taking the 'target' of the
concentrating PV system and building it as a free flying satellite,
that then orbits very close to the Sun. This dramatically reduces
system mass and cost, and further lowers energy costs generated this
way.
Satellite networks provide very sophisticated range of services
including precise global navigation -GPS- as well as global wireless
data services -Teledesic/Iridium-
Laser powered rockets when combined with laser energy generated and
beamed from space at the ten gigawatt level from a network of
thousands of satellites, provide the means using technology available
today, for the emergence of the personal spaceship.
Laser light sails when combined with solar pumped tera-watt lasers and
greater, along with large optical systems capable of projecting beams
of laser energy interstellar distances, provide a means to construct
and maintain interstellar commerce at high speeds exceeding 1/3 light
speed. This same skill set may be used to power entire worlds and
move dwarf planets throughout the entire solar system. Over 120,000
small objects are known, and likely the number is triple this figure
when the Kuiper Belt and Oort cloud are fully surveyed.
What can we expect as a reasonable 'order of battle?'
1) global wireless internet - earns $100 billion per year
global financial services - $1,000 billion per year
telerobotics - $2,000 billion per year
2) solar power satellite- earns $4,000 billion per year to start
coal hydrogenation to $8,000 billion per year
hydrogen fuel to $20,000 billion per year
direct beamed energy from space - more
sun orbiting power satellite - system wide power beaming
sun orbiting power satellite - interstellar beaming
laser light sailing
3) nuclear thermal rocket - early moon and mars development
first bank of luna, first bank of mars
lunar republic, mars republic
lunar industry, mars industry
4) nuclear pulse rocket - asteroidal, kuiper belt survey - capture
return
5) laser rocket - personal spaceship
6) orbiting factory - built with telerobotics and captured asteroids
raw materials -
industrial goods
finished goods
consumer goods - space assembly
food and fiber - space farm, space forests
space homes -
tethers
7) mobile space homes, terraforming the rocky planets, star travel
8) experimentation with artificial black hole dusts
9) experimentation with the giant black hole at galactic center
Number 8 and number 9 are more speculative than the other items on the
list, but hold significant promise. Collding significant shaped
masses of iron-56 at 1/3 light speed or more, has the potential to
create minature black holes. Charging the iron and causing the parts
to strike slightly off-center, imparts charge and spin to the
resulting black holes - stretching their horizons and make them
controllable by external electric and magnetic fields. Collections of
black holes, I call them 'dusts' are used to find our more about space
time and how it may be manipulated by direct action. This may lead to
significant advances in propulsion beyond anything we can know today.
We may be able to directly tap the zero-point-energy of the Higgs
field that is causing the universe to accelerate as it expands, we may
be able to use that energy to replicate engineered collections of
black hole dusts and mass produce machinery once we build it up one
dust particle at a time. We might also be able to build starships and
other machinery of immense capacity. With this machinery we may be
able to use naturally occuring massive black holes to travel through
time and permit us a form of instantaneous communication and travel
not only anywhere in the galaxy group, but to a large number of
parallel worlds we inhabit.
This could all be achieved within the next 60 years - it would already
have been achieved had we pursued space travel with the same wreckless
abandon we pursued nulcear weapons and warfare.
So, once the rocky worlds of the solar system have been terraformed by
the importation of water nitrogen and oxygen as well as carbon from
the asteroids and Kuipers, we have five worlds where humans can walk
free in a shirt sleeve environment - Mercury, Venus, Earth, the Moon,
Mars. Each world is encircled by a ring of industrial, agricultural,
and residential units extended from the tethers rising from the
surface of each world. Mercury and Venus are equipped with planetary
size sun sheilds built using the same skills developed for
interstellar optics. These deflect a portion of light away from those
worlds and use it for industrial power.
Imagine a person who lives on a home on Earth in this era.
The Earth, or any terraformed planetary surface, contains zero
industry but is maintain by a high degree of industrial capacity
overhead.. The Earth and other terraformed worlds are a vast
residential park and natural preserve.
Earth the moon and Mars have regions that are of historical signicance
- ancient cities - or recently opened dome cities.
A family is preparing to leave the solar system for a private
expedition to alpha-centauri. They make arrangements with their robot
staff to maintain their home while they are gone. The husband and
oldest sun organize the robots to ship the 200 tons of personal
belongings to the tether lift nearest their home in a suborbital laser
powered cargo rocket.
Meanwhile the rest of the family, go with mom, aboard a personal
flier, directly to their space home in orbit. Even at a constant one
gee - it takes a little more than an hour - 1 hour 4 minutes 20
seconds to be exact - for the family to arrive at their kilometer long
half kilometer wide cylinder - complete with a terrestrial
environment, farms, and complete robotic staff.
The husband and son arrive with their cargo to lift at the nearest
tether by suborbital rocket. It takes less than 20 minutes to travel
from home, in present day Chile - along the Pacific Coast - to the
nearby tether rising from the Pacific Basin at the equator south of
present day Hawaii, North of present day Tahiti. They circle the
assigned level awaiting landing clearance - in a scene reminescent
from the second star wars movie - with energy pouring down from the
network of satellites, with beams changing from one distant bead to
another as they orbit the massive tower that rises beyond sight.
Finally they land, and the robot staff hired along with the rocket
commence unloading the 200 tons of 'must have' items the family will
use on their interstellar journey.
The 10 cargo containers loaded by the robots back in Chile, are
unloaded and sent one by one zipping up the tether elevator, while dad
offers an implanted RFID in his palm to complete what he
euphemistically calls 'paperwork' - sonny doesn't get it.
That out of the way father and son have lunch at the tether station
surrounding the base of the tether - and decide again whether they
want to ride up the tether, or join ma and the kids by air taxi at
spacehome. Dad calls mom.
The viritual reality implants in each person conjure up a scene at the
luncheonette that would be disorienting to older types not used to the
technology. When mom picks up the connection both get the impression
they are in the aircar with her. Hi honey, I'm just playing scrabble
with the kids, and we're beating her butt - junior says. she smiles -
You sure you can live without us for a few days? the father asks his
wife. Sure honey, she glances at the autopilot we just passed 16,000
clicks altitude now, and passed escape speed about 4 minutes ago.
We'll be spacehome in about 40 minutes. Don't worry about us,
'Fred' (the master robot of the robot team at space home) can handle
everything. Alright, the husband said. You have fun - don't beat mom
too bad Johnny. I won't dad.
The connection is broken and son and father are sitting in front of
their corned beef and rye. Looks like we get to take the lift, dad
says. Sonny is very happy, he has never taken the Earth tether
before, rockets being more convenient, and he wanted to do so before
leaving the solar system for a while. They finish their lunch and the
RFID in their implants pay the bill. No one hardly ever touches
plastic any more.
They book an overnight sleeper train on the next uprun. The trip
takes two days to get to GEO. By that time Mom and Fred will have
navigated the 2 km long spacehome to the tether and will be ready to
dock for a lift to the moon.
The space home uses laser rocket technology to navigate along the ring
to tether dad and sonny are riding to orbit. Once there, they will
reunite with their family, and the entire space home will be joined to
the heavy lifter and raised above GEO, and released at precisely the
right time to arrive with very little correction, to be captured by
the tether at L1. That trip takes 3 days. At L1 the space home will
be equipped with a nuclear pulse driver and momentum conditioning
unit, to give it greater independent range of motion.
This will take a week, and the family uses this as an opportunity to
visit the moon for the last time in a while. They take the laser
powered aircar down to the surface. The family shops for some unusual
gifts for itself at the lunar mall - largest in the solar system - the
best of every human world. Mom and Dad and kids buy another 2 tons of
goods over the four day period - sonny got attached to a girlfriend
who just arrived from Mars to attend school. The heavy goods are shot
up the tether, and family take the laser aircar back to spacehome.
sonny brings his date with him. She's never seen a starship before.
sonny shows her around and they have dinner, and they say their
goodbyes. She takes the tether back to lunar base, and a maglev back
to school.
When the retrofit of the space home is completed at the 'yards'
extending on either side of the L1 tether, it is then lifted past the
neutral point of L1 again - and released at a precisely timed moment.
The spacehome is now on its way to Mars propelled by the motion of the
Earth moon system. When it clears the 1 million km mark, the nuclear
pulse drive kicks in, testing it in flight for the first time. The
low gravity drive is barely noticable in the spinning 1 gee
environment in the space home. johnny and his dog run excitedly
around the pond when the water rises a few centimeters aft - we're
going to alpha centauri we're going to alpha centauri. Otherwise, the
smoothly operating drive, once the momentum transfer unit is done with
it - is barely noticeable even at full thrust. Dad orders the windows
shut, and the artificial sun brought on line just to test out that
system. The holographic projector kicks in with just a brief moment
of noise accurately reproduce a clear blue summer sky within the space
home - the plants and animals in the ancient reproduction farm, that
feeds the family top quality natural foods, staffed by humaniform
robots - in robot village - don't notice the switch over
After all the tests of the thruster arecomplete, the engine is put in
standby and deep space power mode - and additional tests for long term
life support are carried out.
Even with the permitted assist of this engine in the inner solar
system, the transfer to Mars will take 4 months. This the salesman
assured them, would allow them to settle in to a routine that they
will carry out for a few years to come. The training and
psychological counseling of the previous year, kick in, and take
hold.
The family is not alone psychologically. In addition to robot
village, there is also a virtual city with over 10 million
personalities captured at their death mostly, some more recent while
they are alive, inhabiting a virtual New York during its peak at the
end of the 20th century. Many of the best entertainers, and top notch
specialists of every field imaginable are there and available to help
the family on their journey - advising an appropriate robot staff to
carry out whatever needs to be done- whether its create an interesting
piece of art or 'live' performance, or carry out a surgery, or prepare
a world class meal, or help teach a difficult bit of knowledge or
acquire an interesting and useful skill. So, any of the family can
'go to town' for any of a variety of reasons.
When the family arrives at Mars, they are captured by the assigned
tether -again with very little maneuvering required - the heavens run
like clockwork an ancient once said. and its true. Here the ship
is shunted off to another orbiting yard, and a large laser light sail
is attached and tested on site. The family descends the short tether
here to Mars surface, and does some exploring of the old dome city -
that is superfluous now that air and oceans have been imported. They
visit the famous Mars museum that purports to have evidence of ancient
ETI on display. Mom was thrilled, she bought the bit dad says. Dad is
unconvinced. Part of the draw of the museum is that they don't show
you the whole story over the VR net - you've got to come there and see
and 'feel' for yourself. Mars shopping cannot compare to Luna -
backed by 30 billion robots industriously working in 'shops'
encircling the moon. Mars is more laid back - intent on its emerging
biosphere. It has some of the best doctors and geneticists in human
space. It also has some world class robot augments. Mom, the
'gardner' brings a small staff from the 'farm' (of robots) and decides
to stock the freezer with a wide range of new seeds and other
genomes. Despite the cost and variety, the purchases mass less than
100 kilos. So, she and her robot entourage, take an air taxi back up
from Mars surface - and join the family aboard the starship as its
making its way toward the tether to be cast adrift again, this time to
the outer solar system.
When the ship clears the bulk of the traffic well beyond Mars, it
fires up its pulse engine again and accelerates to the designated
'pick up' point. There it unfurls its massive light sail, using micro
rockets built into the sail, and collects a massive blast of laser
energy which is reflected to produce thrust - cutting off the nuclear
pulse thruster..
The centrifuge within the space home is adjusted to allow thrust
levels to rise to one mars- that is 1/3 earth normal while maintaining
verticality and total gee force in the environment.
The windows of the space home are shut against the great light, and
the day night cycles that the plants have come to rely on are
maintained within holographically.
It takes 1 year at 1/3 gravity to achieve 1/3 light speed.
It then takes 14 years to complete the traverse to alpha centauri -
and another year to slow at the Rigel Kentaurus system of stars.
During the run up to light speed - as dad grandly calls it - the
family uses the year to bond and learn new skills and talents - as a
family.
With the new longevity drugs - 16 years to this family would be like a
few months to another family.with aging slowed down by a factor of 100
- estimates are that people will live to over 6,800 years. Of course,
one of the big claims of the drug company that makes these treatments,
is that no one who has taken the treatment, has died, so predictions
are hard to make.
Yet, the despite the farm and robot village, and distractions of the
virtual reality town, mom and dad, after consulting with specialists,
and the kids themselves, have decided they would stay 'up' during the
voyage, to keep current with their professions, but that they would
put the kids down - in hibernation for the 14 year crossing. That is
what is done.
When johnny and sonny reawaken - which seems like only an instant to
them - they see their mom and dad - much as before - a little
different hair style, a lot different clothing, and whose idea was it
to put a bib on a robot? but something else, where did that 12 year
old girl come from?
That's part of what I see possible for us within the next 50 to 60
years - if we don't continue to slack off.
Tethers are in there, and will be instrumental in terraforming worlds
we don't want to bombard with small objects - and they'll be real
important in maintaing large flows of large objects around the solar
system.
They won't be the first things we do, and waiting on them before doing
anything doesn't make too much sense right now.
BradGuth
>
> You mischaracterize what I'm saying. I just think making plans for
> tethers we don't know how to build is foolish since we have a lot more
> to do advancing rockets. Anyone who promotes the use of tethers over
> rockets is needlessly creating roadblocks. Which is something you can
> be relied upon consistently to promote.
That's odd, because I never once said or having implied that the LSE-
CM/ISS tether was going to be cheap or easy, much less of any all-
inclusive or otherwise all-or-nothing kind of ultimatum.
>
> i have said all along the L1 point is a perfect place for navigation
> satellites, observation satellites, communication satellites, power
> satellites at the present time and I intend to see all those in place
> in my life time.
>
> Since we can't build tethers as you describe with any known material,
> nor can we build them with autonomous robots as you describe, the
> point is moot until we can
Your lack and/or insurmountable disdain towards basic tether physics
and obvious intent or focus of nayism is noted. Apparently starting
off as small as you'd like isn't a viable option for the pilot LSE-CM/
ISS and of its basalt or tougher fiber tether, simply isn't a Mook
option.
I have nothing against promoting the R&D that's on behalf of
accomplishing nuclear derived rocket thrust, as I've clearly
stipulated before about my plan of actions including 50/50 public
matching funds for those sorts of qualified private R&D.
However, your mainstream box limited comprehension of setting up
easily established moon anchored tethers, and of the great worth as to
the subsequent future advancements of science and even on behalf of
accomplishing the very salvation of Earth is noted, for the same
reasons you would never contribute a constructive and otherwise
informative word on behalf of relocating our moon, as to interactively
halo orbit that moon within Earth's L1 is equally forever Mook taboo/
nondisclosure rated. Way to go, lord all-knowing Mook.
Willie...@gmail.com
> However, your mainstream box limited comprehension
Means we both understand the physics and engineering realities
involved but you choose to ignore those realities so you can mentally
masturbate about the topic without reference to reality.
> of setting up
> easily established moon anchored tethers,
You yourself said they'd require 256 million tons of materials -
several grand coulee dams - and required 256,000 tons of robots and
tooling on the moon. If you put 256,000 tons of material on the moon
you could turn water into hydrogen and oxygen and refuel spaceships
arriving empty on the moon and achieve the same thing.
Its only when mass flow to and from the moon gets far far bigger that
tethers begin to make sense. Given exponential rates of growth, they
won't take long to develop, but they won't develop until they make
economic and logistical sense.
> and of the great worth as to
> the subsequent future advancements of science and even on behalf of
> accomplishing the very salvation of Earth is noted,
Low cost high performance rockets will save earth long before the
first tether is built
BradGuth
Your continual out-of-context based nayism that's focused only upon
the most negatives of each and every conceivable aspect, is noted.
I have no doubt that nuclear rockets will also do this badly failing
world that's gotten far too spendy and bloody for far too many
innocent folks, whereas such nuclear technology will accomplish a
great deal of good for those few of us still alive and kicking with
spare loot after your WWIII deals with the fossil and yellowcake
energy cartel fiasco that yourself and others of your three-faced
multitasking kind seem to see nothing the least bit wrong with...
. - Brad Guth
Willie...@gmail.com
Nonsense. If you're going to send 256,000 tons of materials to the
moon with chemical rockets, the highest best use of it IS NOT to build
a tether (since we don't know how to do that anyway) but to find a
source of water, and generate hydrogen and oxygen with it to refuel
our spacecraft. In fact you don't need 256,000 tons - something like
5 tons is just fine - a small space nuclear reactor like NEBA III, a
water source, and an electrolysis cryogenic refrigeration unit,
attached to a spent landing stage with cryogenic propellant tanks will
work just fine. A lot easier.
Check it out. To soft land on the moon arriving along a lunar free
return trajectory from Earth, requires a delta vee of 2.48 km/sec.
With an exhaust speed of 4.46 km/sec - that means the vehicle has a
propellant fraction of 42.66% With a structural fraction of 15% -
that leaves 42.34% of the total stage mass as payload.
So, a multi-element chemical launcher derived from the Space Shuttle's
external tank, places 420 tons on a Lunar Free Return trajectory.which
means you can land 177 tons on the lunar surface. Refueling with 180
tons of propellant, allows you to life 177 tons OFF the lunar surface
and fly it back to Earth. Without a tether.
Without refueling the lunar ship would have to carry enough fuel along
to get back to Earth - which subtracts from useful payload. The delta
vee in this case is DOUBLE 2.48 km/sec or 4.96 km/sec - which means
the vehicle in that case has a propellant fraction of 67.12% - with
the same 15% structural fraction that leaves 17.88% payload fraction.
Which means the same ship can carry only 75 tons to the lunar surface
- a loss of 100 tons of useful payload!!
Of course a tether would reduce propellant costs to zero mass - which
means the entire 420 tons - less 63 tons of structure - would be
available to land and lift from the lunar surface - a net payload of
357 tons
So,
With a 420 ton payload arriving at the moon from Earth along a lunar
free return trajectory, here is what you get for each infrastructure
improvement;
Wild lunar highlands - 75 tons - zero improvements
Lunar refueling - 177 tons - 75 tons hardware + 63 tons 'landed'
storage tank
Tether 357 tons - 256 million tons hardware built on the moon
with
256,000 tons of harware
So, to get a 180 tons increase per flight you need to invest 256,000
tons of hardware, so you need 1,420 flights to break-even for that,
and you need to process 256 million tons of lunar material equivalent
to 1.42 million flights supported by lunar materials to break even
there -
Now with a $12 billion fleet of 3 launchers you'd have a launch rate
of about once a week with this technology. That's 50 launches a year
- So, it would take 28,400 years of weekly flights with this fleet to
actually be ahead - assuming the tether needs no maintenance in all
that time.
This isn't nayism - whatever that means - its realism.
Now if you had advanced nuclear pulse spacecraft with 10,000 km/sec
exhaust speeds, your savings would be nil - especially if you reloaded
on the moon when you were there. But your costs would be so small,
that if you are bringing asteroids and kuiper belt objects back to the
moon with your nuclear rockets, it makes sense to build a big tether.
And once you have a tether? It makes sense to use it everyway you
can. Once you know how to build it.
What is a real block to progress is saying we've got to find nanotubes
or whatnot and figure out how to build a tether,and then go build one
before we can justify building big launchers. That's real nayism -
and its precisely the bone headed pathway you'd have us take. any
reasonable analysis shows that tethers won't be important until we're
terraforming worlds with asteroids and kuiper belt objects,
transported there with nuclear pulse technology - then the massive
investment in hardware makes sense compared to the total mass
transfered by it.
> I have no doubt that nuclear rockets will also do this badly failing
> world
utter bullshit.
> that's gotten far too spendy
if you'd actually get a job its not so bad
> and bloody
if you'd actually vote in an election it wouldn't be so bad
> for far too many
> innocent folks,
what have you done personally today this week this month to make a
real difference to someone who needs help? I thought so.
> whereas such nuclear technology will accomplish a
> great deal of good for those few of us still alive and kicking with
> spare loot
innovation is always taken first by those with surplus capital to
risk. It would be a hardship and foolish to ask the poorest to take
such risks. Once the learning curve has been traversed, prices drop
and use of new technology expands. Look at digital watches in the
1970s - they were luxury items, now you buy them in gumball machines.
> after your WWIII deals
War destroys wealth it does not create wealth.
> with the fossil
fossil fuels are our primary energy supply. If you want to change
things, that's where you start. you don't end up staying there
however.
> and yellowcake
> energy
nuclear power too is something that we actually can do something with
- rather than dreaming about tethers that we don't know how to build
yet.
> cartel fiasco
cartels do not promote growth and price reduction So, i'm against
them.
> that yourself and others
I'm the new kid on the block - the upstart - just cause i've done a
few deals doesn't mean that has changed.
> of your three-faced
> multitasking kind
You just say that because it takes the focus off your lies and
stupidity and makes you feel a tiny bit better. Get help Brad you
need it.
>seem to see nothing the least bit wrong
You got that right - things are going GREAT in my life. How about
yours?
BradGuth
>
> Nonsense. If you're going to send 256,000 tons of materials to the
> moon with chemical rockets,
Clue No.1, the vast bulk of that 256,000 tonnes does not go to the
moon, but instead to the moon's L1 (roughly 58,000 km above the lunar
surface), or if you like r34 = 59,100 km.
>
> the highest best use of it IS NOT to build
> a tether (since we don't know how to do that anyway) but to find a
> source of water, and generate hydrogen and oxygen with it to refuel
> our spacecraft. In fact you don't need 256,000 tons - something like
> 5 tons is just fine - a small space nuclear reactor like NEBA III, a
> water source, and an electrolysis cryogenic refrigeration unit,
> attached to a spent landing stage with cryogenic propellant tanks will
> work just fine. A lot easier.
Your notions for pillaging and raping the moon for all it's worth is
noted. The lunar core could actually have a brine like substance of
water, so that going into the lunar interior may be a good move,
exactly as my tether foundation would have accomplished.
>
> Check it out. To soft land on the moon arriving along a lunar free
> return trajectory from Earth, requires a delta vee of 2.48 km/sec.
> With an exhaust speed of 4.46 km/sec - that means the vehicle has a
> propellant fraction of 42.66% With a structural fraction of 15% -
> that leaves 42.34% of the total stage mass as payload.
Terrific, as now all you'll need is an actually proof-tested and fully
prototype documented fly-by-rocket lander, and to think that's going
to be 1000% more than what all of our NASA has ever had to work with
as is. Perhaps you should send a copy of your R&D so that they too
can accomplish such soft landings.
Sadly, you just don't get it, and likely never will no matters what
you're told.
That's not how it works on Earth, and you above all should know that.
When folks die, the trickle-down of their blood means their wealth and
power becomes yours. The rich and powerful of the winning side always
gets richer and more powerful.
>
> > with the fossil
>
> fossil fuels are our primary energy supply. If you want to change
> things, that's where you start. you don't end up staying there
> however.
>
> > and yellowcake
> > energy
>
> nuclear power too is something that we actually can do something with
> - rather than dreaming about tethers that we don't know how to build
> yet.
You mean what William Mook (aka willie.moo) doesn't "know how to build
yet". Why can't you even be the least bit honest to yourself?
>
> > cartel fiasco
>
> cartels do not promote growth and price reduction So, i'm against
> them.
>
> > that yourself and others
>
> I'm the new kid on the block - the upstart - just cause i've done a
> few deals doesn't mean that has changed.
>
> > of your three-faced
> > multitasking kind
>
> You just say that because it takes the focus off your lies and
> stupidity and makes you feel a tiny bit better. Get help Brad you
> need it.
>
> >seem to see nothing the least bit wrong
>
> You got that right - things are going GREAT in my life. How about
> yours?
Unlike your all-knowing self, I've got remorse about what our
government and likes of their brown-nosed clowns and Borg like minions
have done in the past, present and future to the mostly innocent and
to our badly failing environment. Obviously you're set for life,
regardless of who is in charge of your private parts, as well as no
matters how spendy energy gets. I bet you even have a few of those
offshore bank accounts, just in case you have to change sides after
WWIII.
BTW, you couldn't be any more Semitic Third Reich if you tried.
Simply replace the name of willie.moo with willie.hitler and it all
fits almost as good as zionist.mook.
. - Brad Guth
Martha Adams
> On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 10:02:16 -0700 (PDT), Willie...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> That was quite verbose!
>
>
> Gunn.
Whatever Guth is, he's not an engineer. I wouldn't ask him to
spot all the primes smaller than 10, much less to comprehend
the mating between a nut and a bolt. He does serve a useful
function here: Mookie's replies are a treasure of useful facts
and information and of how they go together. If we ever do
get settlements out there, Mookie is the kind of person who
can do it.
Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 Apr 17]
Chris Gunn
wrote:
>"Chris Gunn" <gun...@idontspamme.inet.net.nz> wrote in message
>news:hs0404p35jt6junnq...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 10:02:16 -0700 (PDT), Willie...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> That was quite verbose!
>>
>> Gunn.
>
>Whatever Guth is, he's not an engineer. I wouldn't ask him to
To be exact, I have a degree in Electrical and Electronic Enginnering,
from the University of Canterbury.
My speciality is in strong AI.
>spot all the primes smaller than 10, much less to comprehend
>the mating between a nut and a bolt. He does serve a useful
Now I have to wonder, what is your education?
>function here: Mookie's replies are a treasure of useful facts
>and information and of how they go together. If we ever do
>get settlements out there, Mookie is the kind of person who
>can do it.
Mook is enthusiastic, I haven't checked to see if he is accurate in
his figures or sensible in his ideas, as his verbosity is just too
daunting!
I would like to hear Rands opinion.
However, I suspect he tends to be blind to certain practicalities due
to either choice or lack of engineering experience.
Speaking of which, Cyclers are a bad idea in so many ways. ;-)
Gunn the Engineer
Rand Simberg
Gunn <gun...@idontspamme.inet.net.nz> made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:
>>function here: Mookie's replies are a treasure of useful facts
>>and information and of how they go together. If we ever do
>>get settlements out there, Mookie is the kind of person who
>>can do it.
>
>Mook is enthusiastic, I haven't checked to see if he is accurate in
>his figures or sensible in his ideas, as his verbosity is just too
>daunting!
>
>I would like to hear Rands opinion.
My opinion is that life is too short to wade through it all. I don't
know where he finds the time to write it, or to argue with a raving
lunatic.
BradGuth
> "Chris Gunn" <gun...@idontspamme.inet.net.nz> wrote in message
>
> news:hs0404p35jt6junnq...@4ax.com...
>
> > wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > That was quite verbose!
>
> > Gunn.
>
> Whatever Guth is, he's not an engineer. I wouldn't ask him to
> spot all the primes smaller than 10, much less to comprehend
> the mating between a nut and a bolt. He does serve a useful
> function here: Mookie's replies are a treasure of useful facts
> and information and of how they go together. If we ever do
> get settlements out there, Mookie is the kind of person who
> can do it.
>
> Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 Apr 17]
Meanwhile, all of Earth will be left with whatever his WWIII created.
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 09:51:02 GMT, "Martha Adams" <mh...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> >"Chris Gunn" <gun...@idontspamme.inet.net.nz> wrote in message
> >news:hs0404p35jt6junnq...@4ax.com...
> >> wrote:
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >> That was quite verbose!
>
> >> Gunn.
>
> >Whatever Guth is, he's not an engineer. I wouldn't ask him to
>
> To be exact, I have a degree in Electrical and Electronic Enginnering,
> from the University of Canterbury.
> My speciality is in strong AI.
>
> >spot all the primes smaller than 10, much less to comprehend
> >the mating between a nut and a bolt. He does serve a useful
>
> Now I have to wonder, what is your education?
>
> >function here: Mookie's replies are a treasure of useful facts
> >and information and of how they go together. If we ever do
> >get settlements out there, Mookie is the kind of person who
> >can do it.
>
> Mook is enthusiastic, I haven't checked to see if he is accurate in
> his figures or sensible in his ideas, as his verbosity is just too
> daunting!
>
> I would like to hear Rands opinion.
>
> However, I suspect he tends to be blind to certain practicalities due
> to either choice or lack of engineering experience.
>
> Speaking of which, Cyclers are a bad idea in so many ways. ;-)
>
> Gunn the Engineer
Not that getting bulk tonnage away from Earth and into LEO isn't ideal
for Mook's nuclear rockets, but what information have you for ion
thrusters?
What is the maximum potential of ion exit velocity? ( 0.5'c' ? )
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
wrote:
Mook is highly bipolar, so it's not entirely his fault. I'm merely
dyslexic.
. - Brad Guth
Willie...@gmail.com
> On Apr 16, 6:17 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > Nonsense. If you're going to send 256,000 tons of materials to the
> > moon with chemical rockets,
>
> Clue No.1, the vast bulk of that 256,000 tonnes does not go to the
> moon, but instead to the moon's L1 (roughly 58,000 km above the lunar
> surface), or if you like r34 = 59,100 km.
You are truly clueless if you think that materially changes things.
Projecting something from Earth's surface to L1 reduces the speed
requirement by 2.38 km/sec - which means an energy savings of 1/3 -
so, instead of getting your payback in 28,000 years - you'll get
payback in 19,000 years. BIG WHOOP!
>
>
>
> > the highest best use of it IS NOT to build
> > a tether (since we don't know how to do that anyway) but to find a
> > source of water, and generate hydrogen and oxygen with it to refuel
> > our spacecraft. In fact you don't need 256,000 tons - something like
> > 5 tons is just fine - a small space nuclear reactor like NEBA III, a
> > water source, and an electrolysis cryogenic refrigeration unit,
> > attached to a spent landing stage with cryogenic propellant tanks will
> > work just fine. A lot easier.
>
> Your notions for pillaging and raping the moon for all it's worth is
> noted.
Wait a minute. Lets look at this rationally.
Guth Tether Plan: 256,000 tons distributed between L1 and lunar
surface
unspecified amount ofl lunar material procesed into
256,000,000 tons of tether to support transfer of
an unspecified amount of material each week arrving
from an unspecified source using an unspecified
means
ot transit.
Mook Refueling plan: A 75 ton payload housing a NEBA III powered
nuclear
power unit and an electrolysis
system, and self
erectiing drill set - lands at a
known source of water
and drills into the lunar surface,
hitting water
the water is withdrawn and
processed 231.4
tons per week to provide 25.7 tons
of liquid
hydrogen and 154.3 tons of liquid
oxygen to
refuel a lunar shuttle every week
arriving from
Earth, and leaving 51.4 tons of
spare oxygen
for breathing. The weekly shuttle
brings
177 tons of useful payload to the
moon and
returns 177 tons of payload from
the moon
every week after being refueled on
the surface.
This provides a 100 ton advantage,
and so a
cut down ET carrying 140 people
along with
enough material to supply them for
2 years
arrive every week - in two years we
have a
city of 14,000 - with just one
stinking ship
and one tiny fuel processing
station and
a water supply.
Like I said, it would 20,000 years of the operation I propose to even
match the amount of materials you're talking about on day one using
materials and robots and software that does not exist yet and may
never exist.
Obviously a modest refuling operation is something that we can do
today and pays immediate benefit today. Tethers not so much even if
we could build them, which we cannot at present.
> The lunar core could actually have a brine like substance of
> water,
Some science fiction stories have used that as a plot twist lately,
but what you fail to realize sir is that there is a distinct
difference between well written science fiction and science fact.
And the fact of the matter in this case is that there is no compelling
evidence that the core of the moon is filled with salt water.
> so that going into the lunar interior may be a good move,
Well before we drill to the lunar core we will find a reserve of
frozen water nearer the surface and tap into that, and use a small
nuclear reactor to make hydrogen and oxygen from that water - mixed in
a 6:1 ratio for rocket leaves extra oxygen for breathing. That
combined with spare power from the reactor and spare water from the
well, quickly grows into a sizeable lunar settlement with only one
reusable ship built from a cut down half sized version of the ET
variant used to launch it in the first place.
> exactly as my tether foundation would have accomplished.
Good luck with that.
> > Check it out. To soft land on the moon arriving along a lunar free
> > return trajectory from Earth, requires a delta vee of 2.48 km/sec.
> > With an exhaust speed of 4.46 km/sec - that means the vehicle has a
> > propellant fraction of 42.66% With a structural fraction of 15% -
> > that leaves 42.34% of the total stage mass as payload.
>
> Terrific, as now all you'll need is an actually proof-tested and fully
> prototype documented fly-by-rocket lander,
Wait a minute, lets have another reality check here.
Brad Guthball's Thesis: Unobtainum exists with sufficient strenth to
build a tether from L1 to the lunar surface using basalt. Autonomous
robots with all the required software, power supplies and all the
rest, can be shot off into space along with tools, and arrive at L1
and the lunar surface and set about to reliably, efficiently and
without any mishap or trouble whatever, build something the size of 30
Grand Coulee dams and operate it all without the slightest bit of
human supervision.
Mook's Thesis. Apollo LEM and Surveyor and Lunikod spacecraft
actually landed on the lunar surface, and building 'fly by rocket'
landers to execute a vertical landing along the lines of DC-X on the
lunar surface is possible.
hmm... Mines already proof-tested. Your's not so much.
> and to think that's going
> to be 1000% more than what all of our NASA has ever had to work with
> as is.
Reality Check:
Which is likely to cost more;
Guth's Tether: Finding unobtainium
Testing unobtainiium
Figuring out how to build a tether out of it
Testing the tether design
Figuring out how to make unobtainium in needed
qty.
Testing production method
Automating produciton method
Designing a factory to work on the moon
Sending automated factory to the moon
Operating the factory to build the tether
Operating the tether
Mook's refueling base: Finding lunar water
Landing water processing sttation
Operating station
Refueling lunar vehicle
> Perhaps you should send a copy of your R&D so that they too
> can accomplish such soft landings.
I actually used engineering data from NASA libraries related to the
successful lunar missions to create my current lunar lander designs.
Yes I do.
> and likely never will no matters what
> you're told.
When you actually tell me something demonstrably true and is not the
product of your mental masturbation, I will be pleasantly surprised.
Yes it is. Europe did not follow B2 into Iraq. USA went anyway.
When that decision was taken, the dollar was stronger than the Euro.
Today, the Euro is stronger than the dollar. Even you should be able
to figure out why.
War destroys wealth. We cannot engage in war or prepare for war and
be a great nation in the 21st century.
> and you above all should know that.
If I say a thing it is true, you can count on it.
> When folks die, the trickle-down of their blood means their wealth and
> power becomes yours.
Obviously you are clueless when it comes to creating anything of
value.
People are the source of wealth. It hasn't been since the stone age
that what a person carries around in their pockets is worth more than
what they carry around in their heads.
When anyone dies, the become a mess someone else as to clean up. When
they survive and prosper, they become a blessing to everyone they are
in contact with.
> The rich and powerful of the winning side always
> gets richer and more powerful.
I see, so why did I make so much money shorting dollars after we
invaded Iraq?
When should I start shorting Euros?
> > > with the fossil
>
> > fossil fuels are our primary energy supply. If you want to change
> > things, that's where you start. you don't end up staying there
> > however.
>
> > > and yellowcake
> > > energy
>
> > nuclear power too is something that we actually can do something with
> > - rather than dreaming about tethers that we don't know how to build
> > yet.
>
> You mean what William Mook (aka willie.moo) doesn't "know how to build
> yet".
That's right. I freely admit I know of no material whatever that can
take the stresses necessary to build a lunar tether. If you are now
claiming you have such knowledge, I would suggest that you demonstrate
that fact. I'll buy all the tether material you can make at a good
price,after you weave it into high pressure pipelines and fittings -
I've got hydrogen I got to move.
> Why can't you even be the least bit honest to yourself?
Obviously I'm absolutely honest with you in these posts and everywhere
else. I quote chapter and verse and I am very specific. You on the
other hand not so much.
> > > cartel fiasco
>
> > cartels do not promote growth and price reduction So, i'm against
> > them.
>
> > > that yourself and others
>
> > I'm the new kid on the block - the upstart - just cause i've done a
> > few deals doesn't mean that has changed.
>
> > > of your three-faced
> > > multitasking kind
>
> > You just say that because it takes the focus off your lies and
> > stupidity and makes you feel a tiny bit better. Get help Brad you
> > need it.
>
> > >seem to see nothing the least bit wrong
>
> > You got that right - things are going GREAT in my life. How about
> > yours?
>
> Unlike your all-knowing self,
Just because I know substantially more than you Guth doesn't mean I'm
all knowing.
> I've got remorse
Well, the first step is to forgive yourself your monumental arrogance
and understand that you are wrong - once you accept that, then the
rest is easier.
> about what our
> government
So, when did you vote last time? When did you volunteer to help the
local elections board? When have you donated to the party of your
choice? How much? When did you go to political rallies and so forth,
supporting people you won't be ashamed of? If you've done the work,
if you've walked the walk, if you've fought the good fight - what do
you have to be remorseful about?
Clearly you talk like a loser who prefers to do nothing and then blame
others when things turn out badly. Obviously, if you had a clue back
in the day, and did nothing about it other than sit at your computer
and type bullshit through a dial up connection, YOU are responsible -
partly- for what's going on.
> and likes of their brown-nosed clowns and Borg like minions
They all rely on do nothing losers like you who sit in the basement
and type shit between the times their mom brings down dinner and the
times they play with themselves.
Walk your talk asshole! Then you might have something of substance
to say. Until then, shut the fuck up and leave me the fuck alone!
> have done in the past, present and future to the mostly innocent
Hey, you won't stop dogging me with your clueless bull shit - and I'm
totally innocent.
> and
> to our badly failing environment.
Uh oh - here we go again... can't type a damn thing without getting
this automatic writing done. What do you think about when you write
this shit over and over and over again? Do you get a hard on?
> Obviously you're set for life,
No one is set for life asshole. Just because you imagine others are
set for life doesn't make it so.
> regardless of who is in charge of your private parts,
Unlike you Brad, at least people other than me touch my private parts
from time to time.and I touch theirs.
> as well as no
> matters how spendy energy gets.
Like I said, in a few years, we'll see oil back down to $30 per
barrel.
> I bet you even have a few of those
> offshore bank accounts,
I am sponsoring 8 projects in 5 nations - how would you suggest I
manage the complex issue of financing and operating them across all
those countries? Obviously one needs to have accounts off-shore.
> just in case you have to change sides after
> WWIII.
I bought a beach house near Coogee on a cliff overlooking the Pacific
when I was in Australia recently- and I'm into Euros as I mentioned -
so if the worst happens, yeah, I can take care of my family and
friends. How are you fixed?
I should apologize for that? fuck you.
> BTW, you couldn't be any more Semitic Third Reich if you tried.
uh oh - here we go again with the crap you cannot NOT say. Look Brad,
if you can't get off the internet, try this. Take a week and don't
say the phrase 'semitic third reich' and 'brown nosed' or any of their
analogues. Just refuse to say it. THEN you will see if you make such
a decision - THAT YOU ARE NOT IN CHARGE OF YOUR MIND!! I challenge
you to do that. Just refuse to say those two phrases or any phrase
that means the same thing. Try it for a week. I bet you $10,000 you
can't do it.
> Simply replace the name of willie.moo with willie.hitler and it all
> fits almost as good as zionist.mook.
bullshit. Your totally bogus tether plan cannot be defended so you
sink to personal attacks because that's the only way you can feel
better about yourself. Grow up and get help Jesus.
BradGuth
Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 16, 11:48�pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 16, 6:17 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Nonsense. �If you're going to send 256,000 tons of materials to the
> > > moon with chemical rockets,
> >
> > Clue No.1, the vast bulk of that 256,000 tonnes does not go to the
> > moon, but instead to the moon's L1 (roughly 58,000 km above the lunar
> > surface), or if you like r34 = 59,100 km.
>
> You are truly clueless if you think that materially changes things.
> Projecting something from Earth's surface to L1 reduces the speed
> requirement by 2.38 km/sec - which means an energy savings of 1/3 -
> so, instead of getting your payback in 28,000 years - you'll get
> payback in 19,000 years. BIG WHOOP!
For such an all-knowing wizard that's so intent upon accomplishing so
much other off-world things via your nuclear rockets, whereas oddly
you have such little faith in what that moon's L1 has to offer, much
less of what having created a failsafe and efficient form of to/from
access into the semi-hallow or possibly brine filled interior of our
moon has to offer, not to mention the space depot/gateway/oasis of
what the final 256e6 tonne CM/ISS has to offer.
If that's not a Mook BH of nayism, then perhaps nothing is actually a
BH.
>
> Obviously a modest refuling operation is something that we can do
> today and pays immediate benefit today. Tethers not so much even if
> we could build them, which we cannot at present.
Then God forbid, we should never try to improve on an old and
inefficient method.
>
> > The lunar core could actually have a brine like substance of
> > water,
>
> Some science fiction stories have used that as a plot twist lately,
> but what you fail to realize sir is that there is a distinct
> difference between well written science fiction and science fact.
> And the fact of the matter in this case is that there is no compelling
> evidence that the core of the moon is filled with salt water.
I never insisted that it was, just having gone along with notions that
our moon does not seem to have an iron or thorium core, but instead
our moon seems to have an unusually low density core, if not semi-
hollow in places.
>
> > so that going into the lunar interior may be a good move,
>
> Well before we drill to the lunar core we will find a reserve of
> frozen water nearer the surface and tap into that, and use a small
> nuclear reactor to make hydrogen and oxygen from that water - mixed in
> a 6:1 ratio for rocket leaves extra oxygen for breathing. That
> combined with spare power from the reactor and spare water from the
> well, quickly grows into a sizeable lunar settlement with only one
> reusable ship built from a cut down half sized version of the ET
> variant used to launch it in the first place.
>
> > exactly as my tether foundation would have accomplished.
>
> Good luck with that.
Don't need any stinking luck if those pesky old regular laws of
physics work as well off-world as one might expect.
>
> > > Check it out. To soft land on the moon arriving along a lunar free
> > > return trajectory from Earth, requires a delta vee of 2.48 km/sec.
> > > With an exhaust speed of 4.46 km/sec - that means the vehicle has a
> > > propellant fraction of 42.66% �With a structural fraction of 15% -
> > > that leaves 42.34% of the total stage mass as payload.
> >
> > Terrific, as now all you'll need is an actually proof-tested and fully
> > prototype documented fly-by-rocket lander,
>
> Wait a minute, lets have another reality check here.
>
> Brad Guthball's Thesis: Unobtainum exists with sufficient strenth to
> build a tether from L1 to the lunar surface using basalt. Autonomous
> robots with all the required software, power supplies and all the
> rest, can be shot off into space along with tools, and arrive at L1
> and the lunar surface and set about to reliably, efficiently and
> without any mishap or trouble whatever, build something the size of 30
> Grand Coulee dams and operate it all without the slightest bit of
> human supervision.
"Wait a minute, lets have another reality check here."
You're saying that you can't read? or much less deductively thing
outside of your cozy bipolar box?
>
> Mook's Thesis. Apollo LEM and Surveyor and Lunikod spacecraft
> actually landed on the lunar surface, and building 'fly by rocket'
> landers to execute a vertical landing along the lines of DC-X on the
> lunar surface is possible.
>
> hmm... Mines already proof-tested. Your's not so much.
And yet you and all others of your brown-nosed kind can't seem to
muster up one prototype proof-positive example of the extensive R&D
that supposedly got such fly-by-rocket landers (w/o momentum reaction
wheels or hardly a viable rad-hard computer) to actually accomplish
any series of 100% reliable test flights of any test drop, down-range
and soft landings on Earth.
hmm... Got that objective and thus replicated proof of any sort?
Guess not.
Will, that's clearly why your silly notions are not going to work,
unless you too can pull off a similar ruse/sting of yet another
mutually perpetrated cold-war century.
No you do not even remotely get it, not even in either of your bipolar
mindsets.
>
> > and likely never will no matters what
> > you're told.
>
> When you actually tell me something demonstrably true and is not the
> product of your mental masturbation, I will be pleasantly surprised.
Been there, done that, and lo and behold you were in fact not the
least bit surprised.
Tell that one to those taking us into WWIII, just as fast as their
Zionist/Semitic dirty hands can muster, and at whatever global
inflationary consequences be damned.
>
> > and you above all should know that.
>
> If I say a thing it is true, you can count on it.
Yes God, we can always count on lord all-knowing Mook, even if he's
bipolar, can't we.
>
> > When folks die, the trickle-down of their blood means their wealth and
> > power becomes yours.
>
> Obviously you are clueless when it comes to creating anything of
> value.
>
> People are the source of wealth. It hasn't been since the stone age
> that what a person carries around in their pockets is worth more than
> what they carry around in their heads.
>
> When anyone dies, the become a mess someone else as to clean up. When
> they survive and prosper, they become a blessing to everyone they are
> in contact with.
Your 'trickle up' theory works like a charm, doesn't it.
>
> >�The rich and powerful of the winning side always
> > gets richer and more powerful.
>
> I see, so why did I make so much money shorting dollars after we
> invaded Iraq?
>
> When should I start shorting Euros?
Are you trying to be funny?
>
> > > > with the fossil
> >
> > > fossil fuels are our primary energy supply. If you want to change
> > > things, that's where you start. �you don't end up staying there
> > > however.
> >
> > > > �and yellowcake
> > > > energy
> >
> > > nuclear power too is something that we actually can do something with
> > > - rather than dreaming about tethers that we don't know how to build
> > > yet.
> >
> > You mean what William Mook (aka willie.moo) doesn't "know how to build
> > yet". �
>
> That's right. I freely admit I know of no material whatever that can
> take the stresses necessary to build a lunar tether.
What tether stress are you ever the hell talking about?
It's own mass isn't a physics insurmountable problem.
> If you are now
> claiming you have such knowledge, I would suggest that you demonstrate
> that fact. I'll buy all the tether material you can make at a good
> price,after you weave it into high pressure pipelines and fittings -
> I've got hydrogen I got to move.
Of 4.84 GPa basalt fiber is good enough, although a few other worthy
elements or complex synthetic alternatives can be created as good if
not better without getting into those fibers of spendy CNTs.
>
> > Why can't you even be the least bit honest to yourself?
>
> Obviously I'm absolutely honest with you in these posts and everywhere
> else. I quote chapter and verse and I am very specific. You on the
> other hand not so much.
But you're clearly in denial of being in denial. What do you call
that?
>
> > > > cartel fiasco
> >
> > > cartels do not promote growth and price reduction �So, i'm against
> > > them.
Bust Saddam wasn't even one of those cartel bad-guys.
> >
> > > > that yourself and others
> >
> > > I'm the new kid on the block - the upstart - just cause i've done a
> > > few deals doesn't mean that has changed.
> >
> > > > of your three-faced
> > > > multitasking kind
> >
> > > You just say that because it takes the focus off your lies and
> > > stupidity and makes you feel a tiny bit better. �Get help Brad you
> > > need it.
> >
> > > >seem to see nothing the least bit wrong
> >
> > > You got that right - things are going GREAT in my life. �How about
> > > yours?
> >
> > Unlike your all-knowing self,
>
> Just because I know substantially more than you Guth doesn't mean I'm
> all knowing.
Your actions more than prove otherwise.
>
> > I've got remorse
>
> Well, the first step is to forgive yourself your monumental arrogance
> and understand that you are wrong - once you accept that, then the
> rest is easier.
But I'm not in denial of my denial, as are those of your kind.
>
> > about what our
> > government
>
> So, when did you vote last time? When did you volunteer to help the
> local elections board? When have you donated to the party of your
> choice? How much? When did you go to political rallies and so forth,
> supporting people you won't be ashamed of? If you've done the work,
> if you've walked the walk, if you've fought the good fight - what do
> you have to be remorseful about?
I'm remorseful about having to live with and even associated with
folks like yourself, that according to your very own words and
supposed expertise could have and should have resolved a multitude of
complex issues as of decades ago. What exactly are we waiting for?
>
> Clearly you talk like a loser who prefers to do nothing and then blame
> others when things turn out badly. Obviously, if you had a clue back
> in the day, and did nothing about it other than sit at your computer
> and type bullshit through a dial up connection, YOU are responsible -
> partly- for what's going on.
If asked for my assistance and best wisdom that I could muster, as
such I'd have hired the bipolar likes of yourself as of decades ago,
having at least given 50/50 public support to most of whatever you
keep insisting has been doable. Do you have a better ongoing deal
than that?
>
> > and likes of their brown-nosed clowns and Borg like minions
>
> They all rely on do nothing losers like you who sit in the basement
> and type shit between the times their mom brings down dinner and the
> times they play with themselves.
>
> Walk your talk asshole! Then you might have something of substance
> to say. Until then, shut the fuck up and leave me the fuck alone!
>
> > have done in the past, present and future to the mostly innocent
>
> Hey, you won't stop dogging me with your clueless bull shit - and I'm
> totally innocent.
Innocent of what? (oops! I forgot that you're as good as God ever
created intelligent humans, and you're only poor and pathetic because
it makes you feed extra special)
>
> > and
> > to our badly failing environment. �
>
> Uh oh - here we go again... can't type a damn thing without getting
> this automatic writing done. What do you think about when you write
> this shit over and over and over again? Do you get a hard on?
>
> > Obviously you're set for life,
>
> No one is set for life asshole. Just because you imagine others are
> set for life doesn't make it so.
>
> > regardless of who is in charge of your private parts,
>
> Unlike you Brad, at least people other than me touch my private parts
> from time to time.and I touch theirs.
>
> > as well as no
> > matters how spendy energy gets. �
>
> Like I said, in a few years, we'll see oil back down to $30 per
> barrel.
That a boy, keep the Semitic faith, even though what oil dregs seem
bloody and getting more and more spenty by the day to extract. We'll
be lucky to see it fall much below $100/barrel, that is unless your
Mook hydrogen ever comes to our rescue, and we all know such a Mook H2
thing isn't going to happen as long as lord Mook is alive and kicking
on behalf of butt covering the likes of Exxon/ENRON, plus all else
that's getting offshore banked.
>
> > I bet you even have a few of those
> > offshore bank accounts,
>
> I am sponsoring 8 projects in 5 nations - how would you suggest I
> manage the complex issue of financing and operating them across all
> those countries? Obviously one needs to have accounts off-shore.
No, you do not. What the hell; now you don't trust our private
Federal Reserve banking cartel?
>
> > just in case you have to change sides after
> > WWIII.
>
> I bought a beach house near Coogee on a cliff overlooking the Pacific
> when I was in Australia recently- and I'm into Euros as I mentioned -
> so if the worst happens, yeah, I can take care of my family and
> friends. How are you fixed?
>
> I should apologize for that? fuck you.
Thanks to yourself and those you continually brown-nose, I'm not so
lucky. I made the mistake of investing into those all-American
corporations, and not once intended for any fast or skewed buck
makings. Thus far I'm down by nearly 50 grand.
>
> > BTW, you couldn't be any more Semitic Third Reich if you tried.
>
> uh oh - here we go again with the crap you cannot NOT say. Look Brad,
> if you can't get off the internet, try this. Take a week and don't
> say the phrase 'semitic third reich' and 'brown nosed' or any of their
> analogues. Just refuse to say it. THEN you will see if you make such
> a decision - THAT YOU ARE NOT IN CHARGE OF YOUR MIND!! I challenge
> you to do that. Just refuse to say those two phrases or any phrase
> that means the same thing. Try it for a week. I bet you $10,000 you
> can't do it.
>
> > Simply replace the name of willie.moo with willie.hitler and it all
> > fits almost as good as zionist.mook.
>
> bullshit. Your totally bogus tether plan cannot be defended so you
> sink to personal attacks because that's the only way you can feel
> better about yourself. Grow up and get help Jesus.
Now you're calling me "Jesus"? (thanks, I guess) Whatever happened to
Christ almighty, besides getting put on that stick?
. - Brad Guth